Case Note & Summary
The contempt petition was filed by Sudhakar Pandurang Tandel, a developer, against Bhagavati Prasad Rekhai Pande, Ashok Kumar Rekhai Pande, and the State of Maharashtra. The respondents had filed Regular Civil Suit No. 374 of 1997 seeking a permanent injunction against demolition of a cattle shed on suit property Survey No. 101/A, Tika No.8, known as Khojaka Tabela, Thane. Their application for temporary injunction was rejected, leading them to file Civil Revision Application No. 609 of 1998 before the Bombay High Court. On 2.9.98, the High Court admitted the revision and directed the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously, with an interim order that the applicants maintain status quo as on 2.9.98 and not carry out any further constructions or create third party rights. The petitioner alleged that despite this order, the respondents undertook further construction, thereby breaching the status quo. The suit was dismissed on 3.8.2000, and the first appeal was dismissed on 11.9.2001. The respondents filed an affidavit denying any further construction, stating that the wall in question was always part of the cattle shed. The petitioner relied on a photograph (Exh.B) to show alleged construction. The court found that the contempt petition was not maintainable as the suit had been dismissed and the appeal dismissed, and the petitioner failed to prove willful disobedience beyond reasonable doubt. The court observed that the petition appeared to be filed to coerce the respondents rather than to uphold the dignity of the court. Accordingly, the contempt petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Willful Disobedience - Status Quo Order - The petitioner alleged that the respondents breached the status quo order by undertaking further construction on the suit property. The court held that the contempt petition was not maintainable as the suit had been dismissed and the appeal dismissed, and the petitioner failed to prove willful disobedience beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 1-2) B) Property Law - Status Quo Order - Burden of Proof - The court noted that the respondents denied any further construction and the photograph relied upon by the petitioner did not conclusively prove breach. The court held that the contempt petition was filed to coerce the respondents rather than to uphold the dignity of the court. (Para 2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondents committed contempt of court by willfully disobeying the status quo order dated 2.9.98 passed in Civil Revision Application No. 609 of 1998.
Final Decision
Contempt Petition No. 21 of 1999 is dismissed.
Law Points
- Contempt of court
- willful disobedience
- status quo order
- burden of proof
- dismissal of suit
