Rajasthan High Court
Ishwardas Alias Ishwar S/O Late ... vs Dr. Heeranand S/O Late Shri ... on 7 January, 2022
Bench: Sudesh Bansal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 795/2021
Ishwardas Alias Ishwar S/o Late Shri Ramchand
----Petitioner
Versus
Dr. Heeranand S/o Late Shri Hansaram through LRs
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Alok Chaturvedi through V.C.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Neeraj Kumar Tiwari through V.C.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order
07/01/2022
This contempt petition has been filed, alleging deliberate and
willful non-compliance of the undertaking, given dated 30.10.2019 by
the respondents-contemnors No.1/1 Tulsi Meerchandani and ½
Sehjanand for vacating the rented shop and handing over the
possession of rented shop on or before 13.10.2021, pursuant to the
final judgment and order dated 14.10.2019 passed in S.B. Civil Second
Appeal No. 12/2018.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that both the respondents-
contemnors have flouted the benefit granted to them by this Court vide
order dated 14.10.2019 subject to furnishing undertaking to vacate and
hand over the vacant possession of rented shop to the petitioner on or
before 13.10.2021. But even till date the actual and physical vacant has
not been handed over. Therefore, the respondents at the face of record
guilty for committing the contempt of Court.
The respondents were summoned through bailable warrants and
thereafter have appeared through advocate and filed reply to the
contempt petition on 13.12.2021. In the reply, it has been admitted
that answering respondents furnished written undertaking dated
30.10.2019 pursuant to the order of High Court dated 14.10.2019, to
vacate the rented shop to the petitioner before 13.10.2021 and the
respondents are still ready and willing to hand over the peaceful
possession to the petitioner/plaintiff.
Thus, by apparent admission of the respondents in their reply
dated 13.10.2021, it is more clear on the face of record that even till
(2 of 2) [CCP-795/2021]
date of filing of the reply on 13.12.2021, the respondents have not
vacated and delivered the peaceful possession to the petitioner/plaintiff
though they were under duty and obligation to vacate and hand over
the possession before 13.10.2021. Thus, this disobedience and non-
compliance of the undertaking given by the respondents is apparent on
the face of record. As per Definition of civil contempt, described in
Section 2 (b) of the Contempt of Court Act 1971, the civil contempt
means willful disobedience of any judgment, decree, direction, order,
writ or other process of a Court or willful breach of an undertaking given
to a Court. In the present case, the respondents have breached the
written undertaking given to the Court. Therefore, they are prima facie
guilty for committing contempt and liable to be punished under the
Contempt Court Act, 1971. However, before awarding any punishment
for contempt, this Court deems it just and proper to grant one
opportunity to respondents to purge the contempt and to vacate and
hand over the suit shop to the petitioner within a period of three days.
If the respondents deliver and hand over the possession to the
petitioner, the petitioner shall issue receipt of receiving the possession,
to the respondents. The respondents shall produce the receipt of
handing over the possession to the petitioner, before the next date
albeit both respondents would remain present in person before this
Court for purpose of passing appropriate orders.
Put up on 11.01.2022.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J
TN/87
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
