ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

This appeal has been preferred from an order of the High Court of Bombay dismissing the petition filed by the Appellant against the Respondents for contempt of an interim order passed by the High Court. The petition was dismissed on basically three grounds:

(1) That there was a disputed question of fact involved where it would be necessary to give sufficient opportunity to the parties to lead evidence and cross-examine witnesses in order to come to a definite conclusion whether the interim order had in fact been violated;

(2) That Order XXXIX Rule 2(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure (referred to as the Code) was a specific provision to meet the contingency of breach of injunction orders and when such remedies were available, the person complaining of the breach of the injunction order should not be allowed to take up proceedings of contempt of Court;

(3) The injunction order was passed at an interim stage and the rights of the parties were still to be adjudicated finally.

All three grounds are wholly erroneous.

2. With regard to the first ground; as Section 22 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 provides the right to proceed under the Act is an additional right.

3