$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision:04^th November, 2024 + C.R.P. 105/2023, CM APPL. 21395/2023 SMITA CHAUDHARY .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Harish Malik and M.r Kushal Bhattacharjee, Advocate with Petitioner in person.

versus MS. TARUNA YADAV .....Respondent Through: Lt. Col. Atul Chaudhary.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA J U D G M E N T (oral)

C.R.P. 105/2023

1. A Revision Petition under Section 115 read with Section 151 the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 („CPC, 1908‟ hereinafter) has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner Smita Chaudhary to challenge the Order dated 10.04.2023 vide which the learned ADJ disposed of the Petitioner‟s Application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC without directing the Respondent for purging the Contempt or declaring the Sale Deed executed in violation of Injunction Order dated 30.07.2005 as Null and Void.

2. The Plaintiff/Respondent Taruna Yadav filed a Suit for Partition bearing No. C.S. (OS) 562/1975 of the Suit properties, which are Sahib Sahai Building on Church Mission Road, Delhi and other properties including the agricultural land as per the Schedule of Properties annexed along with the Plaint as Annexure-2. The learned Trial Court granted an injunction restraining all the parties to the Suit including defendant No.10 Smt. Kamla Devi and defendant No. 11 Ms. Taruna Yadav from Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed C.R.P. 105/2023 Page 1 of 13 “alienating, transfer or creating third party right or encumbrances over any or all portions of the Suit properties”. This Order was modified by the Trial Court on 01.06.2017 by stating that “parties are restrained from alienating, transferring or creating third party interest in the Suit property to any third person”.

3. The Revisionist has asserted that the defendants, however, violated the stay Order as the following Suit properties were sold vide Sale Deed dated 06.03.2018 and 08.03.2018 which were registered on 09.03.2018. The details of the properties are as under :

(i) Sale deeds for the following property: Khewat No. 537, Khata No. 550, Mustatil No. 4, Killa No. 25/2(4-12) Kitta-1 Area 4 Kenal 12 merla its 43/92 share area 2 Kenal 3 Merla.

(ii) Khewat No. 544/481 min Khata No. 558 Mustatil No. 4 Killa No. 25/1(3-8), 1 Kitta area 3 Kenal 8 Merla its 1/9 share area 0 Kenal 7.5 merla ever two Khewat total area 2 Kenal 10.5 merla

4. The defendant/Petitioner then filed an Application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC and Section 10 and 12 of Contempt of Courts Act. 1971 for the violation of the Order dated 30.07.2005 and 01.06.2017 by the plaintiff.

5. On 18.05.2018, Taruna Yadav gave an Undertaking that since the Suit properties have been mistakenly sold by her but she continues to be in possession of the portion of the Suit property, she would take steps to get the Sale Deeds qua the aforesaid portions cancelled. However, she failed to take any such steps or file any Compliance Report. On 06.08.2022, Taruna Yadav assured the Trial Court that she would abide by her undertaking and restore the status quo in respect of the Suit properties by reversing the Sale Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed C.R.P. 105/2023 Page 2 of 13 Deed and cancelling the same.

6. It is claimed that Respondent deliberately misled the learned Trial Court leading to passing of the Order on 01.10.2022, wherein she was held guilty of Contempt of Court as she failed to restore the status quo ante after having admittedly violated the injunction Orders passed by the Court. She was directed to be arrested and detained in civil prison in terms of Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC till the time she restores the status quo ante or deposit the entire consideration realized by her upon sale of the land in question, in violation of the Court Order after filing of affidavit disclosing the details of the exact amount realized by her from the aforesaid sale. She was accordingly taken into custody for an initial period of one month and was sent to civil prison.

7. On 07.