C. HARI SHANKAR
Viterra B. V. (Formerly Known As Glencore Agriculture B. V. ) – Appellant
Versus
Sharp Corp Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(C. Hari Shankar, J.)
CCP(O) 41/2023 in OMP (EFA) (Comm) 1/2022
CCP(O) 42/2023 in OMP (EFA) (Comm) 2/2022
1. The petitioner, by this petition, alleges contumacious and wilful disobedience, by the respondents, of the following order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 3 June 2022 in OMP (EFA) (COMM) 1/2022,["the OMP" hereinafter]:
2. Mr. Mehta state, the award of which execution is sought, is against the judgment debtor/respondent company. The liability cannot be fastened upon the Directors of the judgment debtor/respondent company.
3. He on instructions from Mr. Sanjay Singhal, Director of JD/respondent Company state, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the judgment debtor/respondent company and also its Directors, he shall ensure the property being House No.83, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi is not alienated nor any third party rights are created, in respect to that property. The statement is taken on record.
4. It is made clear, the submission made by Mr. Mehta that the liability of the JD/respondent cannot be fastened on the Directors as n
Anil Ratan Sarkar v Hirak Ghosh
Ashok Paper Kamgar Union v Dharam Godha
Bank of Baroda v Sadruddin Hasan Daya
Baradakanta Misra v Bhimsen Dixit
Bathina Ramakrishna Reddy v State of Madras
Chordia Automobiles v S. Moosa
Lt. Col. K.D. Gupta v Union of India
Mrityunjoy Das v Sayed Hasibur Rahaman
National Fertilizers Ltd. v Tuncay Alankus
Niaz Mohammad v State of Haryana
R.S. Sehrawat v Rajeev Malhotra
Rakapalli Raja Ram Gopala Rao v Naragani Govinda Sehararao
Rosnan Sam Boyce v B.R. Cotton Mills Lt.
S. Sundaram Pillai v V.R. Pattabiraman
State of Orissa v Mohd. Illiyas and Uniworth Textiles Ltd. v CCE
Sushila Raje Holkar v Anil Kak
Intent is essential for establishing contempt; mere disobedience is insufficient without a wilful disregard for court orders.
Civil contempt involves willful disobedience of a court order, requiring intentional actions with knowledge of consequences; negligence is not sufficient for contempt.
The court emphasized that contempt proceedings should only be initiated when there is a clear case of wilful disobedience of a court's order and that the respondents followed due process to extend cr....
Wilfully disobeyed the order of injunction – In view of the provisions of Section 22 of the Act of 1971, the provisions of the Act of 1971 are in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions o....
Contempt proceedings necessitate clear evidence of willful disobedience of court orders; mere allegations are insufficient.
Willful disobedience of a court order constitutes civil contempt, and late apologies do not absolve responsibility.
Executing Sale Deeds in violation of a court undertaking constitutes contempt of court, as the statements made by advocates are binding unless proven otherwise.
Contempt - Instant contempt petition filed is beyond the period of limitation. The mortgage has been created in the year 2014 whereas the contempt proceedings has been initiated only in the year 2019....
A sale of company assets after a court order restricting disposal constitutes contempt, allowing penalties while maintaining the validity of the transaction under specific circumstances.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.