Banwari Lal vs Keshav And 10 Ors.
2024 Latest Caselaw 16480 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Banwari Lal vs Keshav And 10 Ors. on 9 May, 2024

Author: Rajeev Singh

Bench: Rajeev Singh

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:35757
 
Court No. - 8
 
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1889 of 2016
 
Applicant :- Banwari Lal
 
Opposite Party :- Keshav And 10 Ors.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Pandey
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Abhishek Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for opposite parties.

2. Present application has been filed with the prayer to summon and prosecute the opposite parties for deliberately and willfully flouting the order dated 16.12.2014 passed by the Hon'ble Court in Second Appeal No.55 of 2014; Banwari Lal Vs. Keshav.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the special appeal was filed against the order dated 07.11.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No.8, Barabanki in Regular Civil Appeal No.53/2012, in which, interim order was granted on 16.12.2014. He further submits that as the opposite parties deliberately flouted the direction of this Court and took possession over the part of the property in question, therefore, they shall be punished.

4. It is evident from the record that Regular Civil Appeal No.53 of 2012 was decided by the Additional District Judge, Court No.8, Barabanki in Second Appeal No.55 of 2014, Banvari Lal Vs. Keshav which was allowed vide judgment and order dated 30.08.2017 and the matter was remanded back to the first Appellate Court for deciding afresh. As it is admitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that again, the aforesaid first appeal was decided by the Appellate Court on 18.05.2018 and the same was dismissed, thereafter, the aforesaid judgment is under challenge in Second Appeal No.3101 of 2018, in which, interim order has been passed on 05.04.2019.

5. As it is well settled that in accordance with the provisions of Doctrine of Merger, the interim order which was passed on 16.12.2014 was merged in the final decision dated 30.08.2017, therefore, the present contempt application is misconceived and liable to be dismissed.

6. Accordingly, the present contempt application is hereby dismissed.

Order Date :- 9.5.2024/V. Sinha