Table of Content
1. background of the contempt petition and the nature of the status quo order violated. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. rival contentions regarding the modification of the injunction order and the timing of the alleged violation. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. court's determination that disputed facts cannot be resolved in contempt proceedings and the acceptance of an undertaking. (Para 9 , 10)
4. withdrawal of the petition with liberty to seek appropriate legal remedies. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)

NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

1. The present contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of order dated 22.12.2023 (Annexure P-3) passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), SAS Nagar, Mohali.

2. On the last date of hearing i.e. 25.03.2026, following order has been passed by this Court:-

“

CM-3220-CII-2025

Prayer in this application is for placing on record the final order on application under Order 39 Rule 1 CPC as Annexure R-3.

The application is allowed subject to all just exceptions and the aforesaid order is taken on record as Annexure R-3.

COCP-2997-2024

Present contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of order dated 22.12.2023 (Annexure P-3) passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), SAS Nagar, Mohali in Civil Suit No.1125 of 2023 titled as “Avtar Singh vs. Amandeep Singh and others”, wherein it was directed as follows :-

“…Heard on exparte ad-interim injunction. The application under order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC is duly supported by an affidavit, copy of Jamabandi for the year 2016-17, copy of sale deed, copy of latha, copy of site plan and copy of Aadhar Card.

Thus, in order to ensure the right of the plaintiff is not violated and also, to balance the rights of the defendants and to maintain equity, the parties are directed to maintain the status quo regarding the existing position of the suit property and throwing of waste/sewerage water of their house, constructed over below mentioned suit property/land as depicted in site map….”

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in blatant violation of the above said status quo direction, the respondents are not only releasing sewerage water into the land of the petitioner but are also raising construction thereupon. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the photographs (Annexure P- 5). It is further pointed out that the petitioner had also moved an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, which was allowed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 17.1.2025 (Annexure R-3) thereby confirming the initial stay granted vide order dated 22.12.2025. Learned counsel refers to the said order and submits that even vide order dated 17.1.2025, it has been directed that “…Accordingly, the present stay application stands allowed with directions to defendants No.1 to 6 to refrain from discharging the water of their house towards the fields of plaintiff and they are further directed to keep the window in question covered till the final decision of the case…”.

Learned counsel submits that despite the above said order, the respondents continue to raise the construction as evident from the photographs (Annexure R-1). It is pointed out that the construction depicted at ground level in photographs (Annexure P-5) is shown to be at lintel level in photographs (Annexure R-1).

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that he has no instructions with regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

In view of the same, let the respondents be present in person before the Court on the next date of hearing.

Adjourned to 18.4.2026.”

3. In compliance of the order dated 25.03.2026 reproduced above, all the respondents are present in person in Court.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents appearing through V.C. submits that there is no violation of the order dated 22.12.2023

Click Here to Read the rest of this document