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

DELHI HIGH COURT
AMIT BANSAL
ICICI Bank Limited – Appellant
Versus
Rashmi Sharma – Respondent


Table of Content
1. overview of the petition and facts. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. court discussions on service notice issues. (Para 7)
3. critique of contempt notice issuance. (Para 8 , 11)
4. plaintiff's argument against contempt. (Para 9)
5. jurisdiction and standards for contempt. (Para 12 , 13)
6. final order and its implications. (Para 14 , 15)

JUDGMENT

[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

Amit Bansal, J.

CM No. 2057/2022 (for exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed of.

CM(M) 36/2022 & CM No. 2056/2022 (for stay)

3. The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order dated 2nd December, 2021 passed by the District Judge (Commercial Court)-06, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi (Commercial Court) in CS (COMM.) No. 2857/2021, whereby show cause notice has been directed to be issued to the petitioner Bank (hereinafter `plaintiff'), to be answered and endorsed through the Chairman, as to why criminal contempt should not be initiated against him for overreaching the process of the Court.

4. The facts giving rise to the filing of the commercial suit leading to the present petition are as follows:

(i)

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top