Pradeep Kumar Sharma vs Shri Town Hall Evam Dharmshala ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 15682 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Pradeep Kumar Sharma vs Shri Town Hall Evam Dharmshala ... on 6 May, 2024

Author: Rohit Ranjan Agarwal

Bench: Rohit Ranjan Agarwal

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:81106
 
Court No. - 51
 

 
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6754 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Sharma
 
Opposite Party :- Shri Town Hall Evam Dharmshala Endownment Trust And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Kumar Tripathi
 

 
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
 

The opposite party had filed a civil suit before the Court below which was dismissed on 29.01.2002. Against the said order, a civil appeal No. 09 of 2002 was filed before the District Judge, Jalaun at Orai. The said appeal was allowed by judgment dated 03.11.2003 and mandatory injunction was granted directing the defendant/applicant that he was to be evicted from the disputed house within two months. Against the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court, a second appeal was preferred before this Court being Second Appeal No. 1272 of 2003. This Court on 09.12.2003 stayed the judgment and decree dated 03.11.2003 passed by the lower appellate Court.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after the stay by second appellate Court proceedings under Public Premises Act was undertaken by the opposite party which had led to the eviction of the applicant and, thereafter, demolition of the house in question. He further submits that the matter has been contested by the applicant before this Court through matter under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

This Court finds that the present contempt application has been filed under Section 12 of Contempt of Courts Act alleging violation of the interim order granted in Second Appeal No. 1272 of 2003. From perusal of the order of second appellate Court, it is clear that the order of lower appellate Court was stayed but there was no bar on the opposite party not to proceed under any other Act or file any other proceedings before any forum. The proceedings initiated under Public Premises Act was brought to its logical end and applicant was evicted from the house in dispute.

As only contempt has been alleged for disobedience of the order dated 09.12.2003, this Court finds that no such wilful disobedience has been done by the opposite party. No case for contempt is made out.

Contempt application is misconceived and dismissed, accordingly.

Contempt notice stands discharged. File consign to record.

Order Date :- 6.5.2024

Shekhar