Smt. Mirabai Ramasare Pardeshi ... vs Ramkali Rambharose Katiar (Since ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 541 Bom

                                                                                       25-cp-125-2020.doc
           Digitally signed
           by PALLAVI
           MAHENDRA
PALLAVI    WARGAONKAR
MAHENDRA
WARGAONKAR Date:
           2023.01.18
           19:36:59
           +0530



                              Pallavi
                                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                                  CONTEMPT PETITION NO.125 OF 2020
                                                                IN
                                                   SECOND APPEAL NO. 288 OF 2013

                                   Smt. Mirabai Ramasare Pardeshi
                                   (since deceased through its LRs)
                                   Shri. Ramasare R. Pardeshi (Bharadwaj) & Ors.   ... Petitioners
                                          Versus
                                   Ramkali Rambharose Katiar
                                   (since deceased through LRs)
                                   1a. Shri. Rameshchandra Rambharose
                                   Katiar and Ors.                                 ... Respondents


                                   Mr. T.D. Deshmukh, for the Petitioners.

                                                                  CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.

DATE : 16th JANUARY, 2023

P.C.:

1. This Contempt Petition is totally misconceived. It is the

contention of the Petitioners that the Second Appeal No.288 of 2013

filed by the Petitioners in this Court was allowed. Thereafter, the

Respondents approached the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court

dismissed the Special Leave Petition on 14th December 2015.

Thereafter, the Respondents filed Review Petition before the Hon'ble

Supreme Court which was also dismissed on 23rd February 2016.

Thereafter, the Respondents filed Regular Civil Suit No.507 of 2018

in the Court of Civil Judge Junior Division, Kalyan at Kalyan, inter

25-cp-125-2020.doc

alia, seeking a prayer that the judgment and decree passed by this

Court in Second Appeal No.549 of 2008 and order passed by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court be declared as per incuriam and not binding

upon the Respondents.

2. It is another question whether such type of suit is maintainable

and whether the Respondents are entitled for said relief. However,

filing of such suit, by no stretch of imagination, can be said as

committing contempt of this Court. The Contempt of Courts Act,

1971 defines Contempt of Court. As per Section 2(a), "contempt of

Court" means civil contempt or criminal contempt. As per Section

2(b) "civil contempt" means wilful disobedience to any judgment,

decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or wilful

breach of an undertaking given to a court. "Criminal Contempt" is

defined under section 2(c) as the publication (whether by words,

spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representations, or

otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever

which (i) scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to

lower the authority of, any court; or (ii) prejudices, or interferes or

tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceeding; or

(iii) interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to

obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner.

25-cp-125-2020.doc

3. By no stretch of imagination, filing of suit seeking above relief

can be considered as wilful disobedience or wilful breach and

therefore, there is no question of Civil Contempt. It is not even the

case of the Petitioners that by the impugned conduct criminal

contempt is committed. Therefore, there is no merit in the Contempt

Petition and the same is dismissed.

(MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.)