ORDER :

1. This MCC has been filed by the applicant under Order 39 Rule 2 (A) of the C.P.C. for willful disobedience of the order dated 08.02.2022 passed by this Court in SA No. 205 of 2021 (P. Reddeyya Vs. Ramchandra Rath) wherein the respondent has given an undertaking that he will vacate the suit premises within six months. Since the respondent has not complied with his undertaking, therefore, the present MCC has been filed. This Court while hearing the Second Appeal No. 205 of 2021 between the parties, has passed the following order on 08.02.2022 :-

“In pursuance of the directed passed by this Court Mr. P. Reddeyya, tenant and Mr. Rachandra Rath, land-lord are connected through Video conference and made their submission. After discussing for some time Mr. P. Reddeyya would submit that he will vacate the possession within six months though Mr. Ramchandra Rath would submit that it is a larger time given to him. Considering the age of Mr. Reddeyya who is aged about 84 years it would be appropriate that Mr. Reddeyya would vacate the possession within six months from today itself.

List this case on 08.04.2022.”

2. The record of the case would demonstrate that the plaintiff- Ramchandra Rath has filed a civil suit before the learned Civil Judge Class-I, Jagdalpur which was registered as Civil Suit No. 1-A/2005 for vacant possession of the suit property House Sheet No. 35, Plot No.07/08, Nazul Sheet No. 50A, Plot No. 62 area 900 out of 1800 sq.ft. situated at Rajendra Nagar Ward Purani Bhatti Road Jagdalpur, remaining rent and for mesne profits from defendant- P. Reddeyya.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to in terms of their status in Civil Suit No. 1-A/2005 which was filed or vacant possession, remaining rent and for mesne profits.

4. The defendant was tenant of the plaintiff and a rent agreement was executed between them and according to the same, the plaintiff has given suit property on rent for Rs. 500/- per month which was enhanced to Rs. 800/- from year 2000. The plaintiff requested the defendant to vacate the suit premises, but he has not vacated the suit house, therefore, he has filed a civil suit for vacant possession, remaining rent and for mesne profits. Learned trial Court after appreciating the evidence and material placed on record has decreed the suit and directed the defendant to vacate the suit premises and also to give remaining rent of Rs. 19,200/- to the plaintiff. Against that judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court, the defendant has preferred first appeal before the learned District Judge, Bilaspur bearing Civil Appeal No. 11A/2008 which was dismissed vide judgment dated 29.04.2009. Against that he has preferred an appeal bearing S.A. No. 260/2009 before this Court which was allowed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment and decree dated 05.03.2021 and remanded the matter to the court below to decide the matter in accordance with law and thereafter the appeal was again heard by learned District Judge, Jagdalpur who vide judgment dated 15.07.2021, dismissed the appeal. Against that, the defendant has preferred an appeal bearing S.A. No. 205/2021, which has not yet been admitted by this Court wherein this Court has passed the order on 08.02.2022 as stated above, which has not been complied with, hence, this MCC for initiating proceedings against the defendants has been filed.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that since the defendant has given undertaking which he has not fulfilled, therefore, he has committed the breach of undertaking, as such, contempt proceedings may be drawn against him. He would further submit that the undertaking given before this Court will amount to breach of injunction passed by this Court and the same issue has come up for consideration before Hon'ble the Supreme Court in case of Welset Engineers & another Vs. Vikas Auto Industies & others reported in (2015) 10 SCC 609 and before High Court of Rajasthan in case of Gov