Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Hero Wind Energy Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Balachandra Nadar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. contempt petition filed under non-compliance. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. details of agreements and alleged defaults. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. limitation period under contempt of courts act. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. conclusion and dismissal of petition. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT
Subramonium Prasad, J. The instant contempt petition has been filed for non-compliance of the Order dated 03.04.2018 passed by this Court in OMP (I) No.592/2015.
2. Shorn of details, the brief facts leading to the filing of the instant contempt petition are:
a) The Petitioner and Respondent No.4 entered into a Site Development, Land Acquisition and Construction Services Agreement dated 23.08.2013 for developing a wind farm of capacity of 74 MW. Dispute arose between the parties.
b) The Petitioners filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, being OMP (I) No.592/2015. This Court referred the parties to Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. In the mediation proceedings, the parties entered into an amicable settlement. Settlement agreement dated 12.05.2016 was entered into between the parties. The relevant portion of the said
Contempt proceedings require a clear, specific undertaking to pay, and lack of timeliness in filing for contempt can render such actions barred under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Civil contempt involves willful disobedience of a court order, requiring intentional actions with knowledge of consequences; negligence is not sufficient for contempt.
The significance of respecting undertakings given to the court and the consequences of persistent breach of consent decrees in property disputes.
The court emphasized the necessity to resolve contempt allegations before proceeding with arbitration to uphold the integrity of the judicial process and ensure fairness.
The undertaking given to the Court binds the party, and failure to comply with it constitutes civil contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
The court ruled that failure to sign a Memorandum of Understanding precludes claimants from benefits, and contempt proceedings cannot challenge prior judgments.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
