Wilful disobedience must be established for contempt proceedings. Mere averments or bald statements are not sufficient. The absence of wilful disobedience and non-occupancy of the suit property by the alleged contemnor led to the dismissal of the application.

ORDER

Chandra Dhari Singh, J. (Oral)

I.A. 2104/2022 (Under Order XXXIX Rule 2A)

1. The instant application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter "CPC") has been filed on behalf of the defendants no. 1 and 2/applicants seeking the following reliefs:

"A. Pass an Order taking cognizance under Order 39 Rule 2A of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 of the disobedience of Order dated 04.10.2013 passed by this Hon'ble Court in the present Suit;

B. Pass an Order under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 directing the police officials to ensure the implementation of the Order dated 04.10.2013 passed by this Hon'ble Court in the present Suit;

C. Pass an Order directing Mr. Naresh Chopra to vacate the Property located at 22, Rajpur Road, Civil Lines Delhi-110054;

D. Pass an Order directing Mr. Naresh Chopra to remove the lock from the main gate and/or any other lock(s) on the Property located at 22, Rajpur Road, Civil Lines Delhi-110054;

E. Pass an Order restricting Mr. Naresh Chopra from committing acts/ommissions that result in violation of the Order dated 04.10.2013 passed by this Hon'ble Court in the present Suit;

F. Pass an Order restricting Ms. Sangeeta Kalevar from taking physical possession of the Property located at 22, Rajpur Road, Civil Lines Delhi-110054;

G. Pass an Order directing Mr. Naresh Chopra and Ms. Sangeeta Kalevar to deposit the key(s) to the Property located at 22, Rajpur Road, Civil Lines Delhi-110054 with this Hon'ble Court till the pendency of the present Suit; H. Pass any other further Order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this Hon'ble Court."

2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants submitted that the captioned suit has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff against the defendants seeking inter alia the cancellation of the registered Sale Deed dated 12th January 2006. In the said suit proceedings, the Predecessor Bench of this Court granted an interim injunction restraining the defendants from selling, encumbering, alienating and/or parting with possession of the suit property vide the order dated 29th January 2007.

3. It is submitted that on 2nd October 2013, during the pendency of the suit and operation of the interim order, the defendant no. 2 visited the suit property and found a Notice Board put up by the plaintiff and her Power of Attorney holder on which they had written that the said suit property belongs to the plaintiff, Ms. Asha Gupta (now deceased). It is submitted that the letter was put up with the mala fide intention of selling, alienating the suit property to the detriment of the applicants. Therefore, an interim application bearing I.A. No. 16064/2013 under Order XXXIX Rule 2 of the CPC was filed by and on behalf of the defendant no. 2 seeking inter alia issuance of directions to the plaintiff to remove the aforementioned Notice Board.

4. It is submitted that during the course of the proceedings on 4th October 2013, the counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff made a statement before the Predecessor Bench that Mr. Naresh Chopra is the duly constituted Power of Attorney of the plaintiff, late Ms. Asha Gupta. The counsel for the plaintiff also assured that the Notice Board put up on the suit property would be removed. It is submitted that the Power of Attorney holder is bound by the statement made before the Court and hence, is also bound to obey the same.

5. The learned counsel submitted that the alleged contemnor/Power of Attorney holder of the deceased plaintiff wilfully, deliberately and intentionally disobeyed the order dated 4th October 2013 passed by the Predecessor Bench of this Court. It is submitted that he has directed the plaintiff's security guards to lock the main gate of the property, he visits and occupies the suit property every day, and moreover, he has converted a room in the suit property to his personal office as a property dealer.

6. It is