Allahabad High Court
Dinesh Kumar Verma Official ... vs Manjari Singh on 26 July, 2022
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Saroj Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 1
Case :- CONTEMPT APPEAL No. - 3 of 2022
Appellant :- Dinesh Kumar Verma Official Liquidator City Cooperative Bank Ltd.
Respondent :- Manjari Singh
Counsel for Appellant :- Shashi Prakash Singh,D.S. Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- Kazim Ibrahim
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
(C.M. Application No.59245 of 2022.)
This application has been filed on behalf of the appellant for recalling of the order passed by this Court on 26.04.2022, by which the contempt appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he has filed the present recall application for recalling the Court's order dated 26.04.2022 on the ground that due to some unavoidable circumstances he could not make mention in the morning for taking up the matter.
Therefore, the application for recall is allowed and the order dated 26.04.2022 is hereby recalled.
(Mrs. Saroj Yadav, J.) (Ramesh Sinha,J.)
Order Date :- 26.7.2022
A.K. Singh
Case :- CONTEMPT APPEAL No. - 3 of 2022
Appellant :- Dinesh Kumar Verma Official Liquidator City Cooperative Bank Ltd.
Respondent :- Manjari Singh
Counsel for Appellant :- Shashi Prakash Singh,D.S. Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- Kazim Ibrahim
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
Heard Mr. Shashi Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Kazim Ibrahim, learned counsel for the respondent.
This is a contempt appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 challenging the order dated 28.03.2022 passed in Contempt No.1618 of 2011 (CAPL) [Manjari Singh Vs. Sri J.P. Chaturvedi, Official Liquidator, City Cooperative ] which reads as under:
"1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri D.S. Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite parties.
2. By means of the present contempt application, it has been alleged that there is non compliance of the judgment and order dated 7.10.2010, passed in Writ Petition No.1254 (M/B) of 2002, whereby following order was passed :-
"Upon hearing Sri P. K. Singh learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Pritish Kumar learned counsel for the respondent Bank the petition is disposed of with the direction to the Liquidator of the Bank in question to consider the claim of the petitioner and if the claim of the petitioner is found to be correct, then the entire amount claimed shall be released with interest as per agreement within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
With the aforesaid direction the writ petition is disposed of finally"
3. A counter affidavit has been filed by one Mr. J.P. Chaturvedi, posted as Official Liquidator of City Cooperative Bank Limited, wherein Annexure CA-9 has been enclosed, whereby sanction has been made for untraceable depositors before repaying deposits exceeding Rs.1 Lakh.
4. On the basis of counter affidavit filed by Mr. Dinesh Kumar Verma, new incumbent working as Official Liquidator, statement of fact has been made by passing an order on 30.3.2011 that Rs. 1 Lakh has been paid to the applicant and for payment of more than Rs.1 Lakh, sanction is required, then the payment can be made.
5. This is clear cut and wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court dated 7.10.2010, therefore, issue notice to Mr. Dinesh Kumar Verma, Official Liquidator, City Cooperative Bank Limited that why he may not be punished for wilful and deliberate contempt of Court's order dated 7.10.2010. He shall appear before this Court on 12.4.2022 for framing of charges.
6. List on 12.4.2022"
We have also perused our earlier order dated 26.04.2022. It seems that law on the subject was not pointed out on the earlier date. The law is as has been declared and clarified in the case reported as (2006) 5 SCC 399, 'Midnapore Peoples' Coop. Bank Ltd. vs. Chunilal Nanda and Ors', and paragraph no.11 (I.) of it reads as under:
"11. The position emerging from these decisions, in regard to appeals against orders in contempt proceedings may be summarized thus:
I. An appeal under Section 19 is maintainable only against an order or decision of the High Court passed in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt, that is, an order imposing punishment for contempt."
There is another judgment reported in (2015) 12 SCC 514, 'Sujitendra Nath Singh Roy vs. State of West Bengal and Ors.' enunciating the law on the subject, paragraph no.5 of which reads as under:-
"5. There is no caveat to the proposition of law that under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 an appeal lies before the Supreme Court only against such order of the High Court which imposes punishment for contempt and no appeal will lie against an interlocutory order or an order dropping or refusing to initiate contempt proceedings. This was clearly laid down in State of Maharashtra v. Mahboob S. Allibhoy. This view was also followed in several cases including in Midnapore Peoples' Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Chunilal Nandas."
In view of what has been held by Hon'ble the Supreme Court, appeal against the order dated 28.03.2022 would not lie firstly because by the said order notice has been issued to the contemnor to reply why he may not be punished for willful and deliberate contempt of the Court, as the order dated 07.10.2010 passed by the Court was not complied with. He was further directed to appear before the Court for framing of charges and secondly, even against such an order, the appeal would not lie under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 in view of the law referred herein above. The appellant has opportunity to put forth his version before the Contempt Court and, as of now, no order of punishment has been passed against the appellant nor has he been convicted and/or sentenced as yet and all issues are still open for consideration before the Contempt Court and any plea being raised by the appellant would also be considered.
In view of above discussion, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.
(Mrs. Saroj Yadav, J.) (Ramesh Sinha,J.)
Order Date :- 26.7.2022
A.K. Singh
