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

2022 Supreme(Del) 1559

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Subramonium Prasad, J.
Navin Soni - Appellant
Versus
Munish Soni & Ors. - Respondents
Cont.Cas(C) 640 of 2018 and CM Appls. 16138-39 of 2022
Decided On : 26-04-2022

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Vikas Arora, Ms. Radhika Arora, Mr. Mohit Dagar and Mr. Siddharth Singh, Mr. Ayush Kumar, Advocates, for the Appellant; Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, Mr. Akshay Soni, Advocates, for the Respondent.

Headnote:

Contempt - Violation of Undertaking - Order XXIII Rule 3 - [CONTEMPT] - [VIOLATION OF UNDERTAKING] - [Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC] - The court discussed the violation of the undertaking given to the Court in the Order dated 21.09.2012 passed by this Court in CS (OS) 2077/2006. The Respondents were duty-bound to vacate the premises on or before 30.09.2017, which they failed to do. The court analyzed the legal provisions under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC and emphasized that the violation of a compromise decree and an undertaking given to the party can result in contempt of Court.

Fact of the Case:

The suit for possession, permanent injunction, and mesne profit/damages was filed against the Respondents. A compromise was reached, and the Respondents agreed to vacate the premises by a specified date. The Petitioner filed a contempt petition when the Respondents did not vacate the premises as agreed.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found the Respondents guilty of contempt for violating the undertaking given to the Court. The Court emphasized the importance of upholding the majesty of the law and the purpose of the law of contempt in building confidence in the judicial process.

Issues: Violation of Undertaking, Contempt of Court, Breach of Compromise Decree

Ratio Decidendi: The violation of a compromise decree and an undertaking given to the party can result in contempt of Court. The purpose of the law of contempt is to build confidence in the judicial process and uphold the majesty of the law.

Final Decision: The Respondents were found guilty of contempt of Court. The Court directed the Respondents to be present for arguments on sentence on the next date.

ORDER

Subramonium Prasad, J. - The instant contempt petition has been filed for initiating contempt proceedings against the Respondent No. 1 for violating the undertaking given to the Court in the Order dated 21.09.2012 passed by this Court in CS (OS) 2077/2006.

2. Shorn of details, the facts leading to the filing of the instant contempt petition are that a suit for possession, permanent injunction and for mesne profit/damages was filed against the Respondents by one Badri Prakash Soni, who was the father of the Petitioner and the Respondent No.1. During the pendency of the suit, the parents Badri Prakash Soni and Asha Soni passed away, and Vikas Soni and Navin Soni (Petitioner herein) were impleaded in lieu of the deceased parents.

3. In the suit, the parties, who are related to each other, entered into a compromise. Under the said compromise, the Respondents Munish Soni and Piyush Soni agreed to handover the ground floor of the premises, i.e. B-2/103, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi, to the Petitioner on or before 30.09.2017. Apart from this, the Defendants therein (this includes the Petitioner herein) were made to pay a sum of Rs. 1 Crore under the said compromise. An application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC was filed. The relevant portions of the said application reads as under:

    'f) That the defendants also admit that Smt. Asha Soni plaintiff no.2 now deceased, was the absolute owner of property bearing No.B-2/103 Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi - 110 029 and after her death by virtue of her registered Will dated 23rd July, 2009 the said property has now devolved upon Shri Vikas Soni and Shri Navin Soni absolutely without any right, title or interest to any other class I legal heirs including defendants. Thus, the said entire property bearing No.B-2/103 Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi - 110 029 is absolutely owned by Shri Vikas Soni and Shri Navin Soni alone.

    j) That since the defendants are hard pressed of the money and the marriage of defendants Shri Piyush Soni and Ms. Shristhi Soni have to be solemnized in December and October, 2012 respectively, the defendants have requested Shri Vikas Soni and Shri Navin Soni to contribute a sum of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One crore only) towards the expenses to be incurred by defendent no.1 on the marriage of defendant nos.2 and 3 which Shri Vikas Soni and Shri Navin Soni have voluntarily agreed to give the same to defendant no.l for enabling him to incur the expenses of marriages of Shri Piyush Soni and Ms. Shristhi Soni. Since the marriage of Ms. Shristhi Soni is fixed on 29th October, 2012, and immediate expenses have to be incurred, therefore, on the request of defendant no.1, Shri Vikas Soni and Shri Navin Soni have agreed to pay the substantial amount in cash and accordingly have paid Rs.80,00,000/- (Rupees Eighty lacs only) in cash to defendant no.1 and Rs.20,00,000/-(Rupees Twenty lacs only) by means of cheque No.937034 dated 17/09/2012 drawn on Indian Overseas Bank, the receipt of which the defendants both hereby acknowledges to have received.

    m) That though the applicants have agreed to gift Rs.l crore to defendants, but it has been agreed to be gifted to the defendants only upon the conditions that defendants shall positively vacate the portion of the said premises i.e. ground floor of property bearing No.B-2/103 Safdarjung Enclave, Delhi on or before 30th September, 2017 and shall hand over physical vacant possession of the same to Shri Vikas Soni and Shri Navin Soni or any other person or persons claiming under them without any demur and condition and in this regard undertake to this Hon' ble Court to abide by the said undertaking punctually and absolutely.

    n) That the said undertaking has been given by the defendants knowing fully well the consequences of the same and it is agreed between the parties that in case the defendants for any reason whatsoever delays the delivery of possession of the entire ground floor to Shri Vikas Soni and Shri Navin Soni beyond 30th September,

            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