JUDGMENT

B. P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.:—In, a suit for specific performance certain interlocutory orders were passed by a single Judge of the Calcutta High Court. On appeal a Division Bench of the said Court modified the said orders. A number of special leave petitions were filed in this Court against the orders of the Division Bench. Though the petitioners in these special leave petitions are different, the contesting respondents - in all these cases are common, namely Russel Estate Corporation and its managing partner Sri Hari Narayan Bhan.

2. For the purpose. of this petition, it is enough to mention that each of the petitioners in these S.L.Ps. is claiming to be entitled to allotment of one or more of the flats being constructed by the respondents at Calcutta. Their complaint has been that ignoring the agreements in their favour, the respondents have been allotting the constructed flats in favour of third parties thereby seeking to defeat their rights. On 1-8-1991 a Bench of this Court comprising of S. Ranganathan, M. Fathima Beevi and N.D. Ojha, JJ. passed the following order in I.A. No. 2 of 1991 after hearing the respondents.

"Counsel accepts notice. In the meantime, till this Special Leave Petition is disposed of, respondents 1 & 2 should not make any further allotment of any other flats in the building in dispute, with effect from today.

Counsel for the petitioner contends that the allotment of the flat, originally allotted to him, to some other person violates an oral order of a Division Bench of the High Court. It will be open to the petitioner to move the High Court for appropriate relief in this regard if so advised."

3. This Contempt Petition is filed complaining that the respondents have allotted certain flats in favour of third parties in violation of the said order.

4. So far as the petitioners in this Contempt Petition (Major Genl. B.M. Bhattacharjee and Smt. S. Laha) are concerned, they claim to be interested in the flats on the 8th floor of the said building. At any rate the complaint in this Contempt Petition pertains to the said two flats. The petitioners say that the said flats have been allotted to the third parties in the month of January, 1992. They rely upon the report of a group of investigators (National Bureau of Investigation) in support of the said plea.

5. Notice was issued to the respondents. In their counter (filed by Shri Hari Narayan Bhan) it is stated that the two floors on the 8th floor (described as east and west flats) were allotted on 26th April, 1991 itself i.e., long prior to the order of this Court dated 1-8-1991. It is denied that the allotment of said flats took place in the month of January, 1992. The correctness of the Report of the National Bureau of Investigation is disputed. It is, however, conceded that the possession of the said flats was handed over to the said third parties on 17th August, 1991 - which is admittedly a date subsequent to the date on which this Court passed the aforesaid restraint order. It is also not disputed by them that the registered sale-deeds in respect of said flats in favour of the said third parties were also executed in March, 1992.

6. The report of the Receiver (Smt. Pratibha Bonnerjea, a retired Judge of the Calcutta High Court who was appointed as such by an order of this Court dated 7-1-1992) also supports the petitioners allegations. The relevant portion of the Report reads as follows :

"Present condition of these two flats in the 8th floor :

The western apartment in the 8th floor is occupied by one Mr. & Mrs. Kamal Thavrani, Ms. Thavrani said that they are in occupation of the flat from December, 1991. Mr. K.K. Thavrani said that he had taken both the eastern and western apartments in the 8th floor. He produced a copy of the agreement executed on 26-4-91 on a stamp paper purchased on 26-4-91 by M/s. Russel Estate Corporation. The agreement relates to both the flats on the 8th floor for a total consideration of Rs. 13,40,000/-. It is stated that the occupie