Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Kamlesh Rani – Appellant
Versus
Sanjeev Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SUDEEPTI SHARMA J.
1. The present contempt petition has been filed alleging deliberate and willful disobedience of the order dated 19.01.2023 passed by this Court in CR-8775-2014, whereby the respondents were directed to hand over peaceful and vacant possession of the property in question to the petitioner/landlord on or before 30.04.2023.
2. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the vacant possession of the property has now been handed over to the petitioner on 05.09.2025.
3. It is not in dispute that order dated 19.01.2023 has attained finality. The respondent had furnished a categorical undertaking before this Court agreeing to vacate the premises by the stipulated date, on the strength of which the CR No. 8775 of 2014 filed by respondent-tenant titled as Nafe Singh through his LRs. Ramesh Tanwar & Ors. Vs. Kamlesh Rani & Anr. was disposed of. Compliance is made only on 05.09.2025, after an inordinate delay of nearly two years beyond the period fixed by this Court.
4. For attracting civil contempt, the following ingredients are required to be satisfied: (i) existence of a lawful and binding order of the Court; (ii) knowledge of such order by the alleged contemnor
Willful non-compliance with a Court order constitutes civil contempt, requiring both knowledge of the order and deliberate disobedience, as reaffirmed in the Court’s findings.
Contempt of Court – Courts ordinarily take lenient approach in a case of some delay in compliance of orders, unless same is deliberate and willful.
The court must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the contemnor has willfully, deliberately and intentionally violated the court's order. If the disobedience is the result of some compelling c....
Contempt proceedings necessitate clear evidence of willful disobedience of court orders; mere allegations are insufficient.
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 of Court – Any person who misuses process of Court with ulterior motives cannot be said to be a person having approached Court with clean hands – A person who tries to tarnish process of lit....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that willful disobedience of court orders related to an arbitral award, including unreasonably delaying compliance and seeking to avoid compliance,....
Contempt - Appellant can be exonerated for contempt of court giving benefit of doubt as he tendered unconditional apologies sincerely for the delay in implementation of the order of the court with al....
The court ruled that mere delay does not equate to willful disobedience, emphasizing the need for intentional violation to establish contempt.
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
