SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(SC) 352

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.N. Agrawal Dalveer Bhandari & Lokeshwar Singh Panta
Rama Narang-PETITIONER
VERSUS
Ramesh Narang & Another-RESPONDENT
Contempt Petition (civil) 148 of 2003
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.148 OF 2003
IN
CONTEMPT PETITION NOS.265-267 OF 1999
IN
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 209 OF 1998
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.366 OF 1998
DECIDED ON : 15/03/2007

Headnote:A. Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Section 2(b) - Majesty of the Court and the Rule of Law – Must be maintained - Can never be maintained unless Court ensures meticulous compliance of its orders - Wilful violation of undertaking given by a party to court – Amounts to contempt of Court - Parties litigating for long - Entering into consent terms and gave an undertaking to Court - Court passed an order on consent terms - Party willfully violating the order - Guilty of contempt of court under Section 2(b) of Contempt of Courts Act - Sentenced to 2 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-.

       [Paras 51, 52, 46 and 47]

JUDGMENT

Dalveer Bhandari, J.

This is an unfortunate litigation amongst the most intimate family members where the father has been driven to file a contempt petition against his sons. The parties are intensely involved in inter-se litigation for the last two decades. The petitioner, Rama Narang is the father of Ramesh Narang and Rajesh Narang, the respondents herein. Both are the children of his first wife, namely, Motla, whom he divorced in 1963. The petitioner has three children from his second wife Mona, namely, Rohit, Ramona and Rahul.

The petitioner has prayed that the respondents herein namely Ramesh and Rajesh are guilty of committing gross contempt of the orders of this Court dated 12.12.2001 and 8.1.2002.

The petitioner in this contempt petition has also prayed that the order dated 12.12.2001 may be recalled. The petitioner has further prayed that respondent no. 2, Rajesh Narang be restrained from interfering in the affairs of Narang International Hotels Ltd. (for short, NIHL) and its joint management by the petitioner, Rama Narang and respondent no.1, Ramesh Narang.

It is further prayed that the bank accounts of the company hereinafter be operated jointly for all amounts and transactions by the petitioner and respondent no.1 only.

The petitioner stated that the disputes between the petitioner and the respondent-contemnors inter se were subject-matter of diverse court proceedings with regard to shareholdings and control and management of the company, NIHL and Fashion Wears Pvt. Ltd.

It is incorporated in the contempt petition that for accomplishing the object of ever-lasting peace in the family and having regard to the views exchanged in the family, all groups should work, be represented and have trust in one another. All groups should run the company harmoniously with the active participation of all as a family business. The consent terms dated 12th December, 2001 were entered into, accepted and incorporated by this Court while finally disposing of all the disputes between the parties.

The terms embodied in the order of 12th December, 2001 reads as under:-

"The following cases are pending between the parties who are parties in the present proceedings before us one way or the other. We are told that all the parties have settled their disputes in respect of all the litigations specified below.

1. O.S. No. 3535 of 1994 before the

Bombay High Court.

2. O.S. No. 3578 of 1994 before the

Bombay High Court.

3. O.S. No. 1105 of 1998 before the

Bombay High Court.

4. O.S. No. 3469 of 1996 before the

Bombay High Court.

5. O.S. No. 1792 of 1998 before the

Bombay High Court.

6. O.S. No. 320 of 1991 before the

Bombay High Court.

7. Company Petition No. 28 of 1992

before the Principal Bench, Company

Law Board, New Delhi.

8.Arbitration Suit No. 5110 of 1994

before the Bombay High Court.

Today they filed a document styled it as "MINUTES OF CONSENT ORDER" signed by all the parties. Learned counsel appearing on both sides submitted that all the parties have signed this document. Today except Mona Narang and Ramona Narang (two ladies), all the rest of the parties are present before us when these proceedings are dictated. As for Mona Narang and Ramona Narang learned counsel submitted that Mona Narang had affixed the signatures and the power of attorney holder of Ramona Narang has signed the above document in his presence. This is recorded.

Both sides agreed that all the suits can be disposed of in terms of the settlement evidenced by "MINUTES OF CONSENT ORDER" produced before us. For disposal of those cases and/or for passing decrees in them we have to pronounce the final formal order in terms of the settlement now produced before us.

We, therefore, withdraw all the aforesaid suits to this Court under Article 139-A of the Constitution of India.

Prothonotory and Senior Master of the Bombay High Court is directed to transmit the records in the above mentioned suits by special messenger to this Court so as to reach the Registry here within ten





























































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top