Case Note & Summary
The contempt petition was filed by Sou. Nirmala Chandrashekar Madki and Chandrashekhar Annarao Madki alleging that the respondent, Basavraj Nagappa Dhanne, wilfully disobeyed a permanent injunction dated 18.11.1994 passed by the 5th Joint C.J.S.D., Solapur in Regular Civil Suit No.674 of 1993, which restrained him from dispossessing the petitioners from the suit premises. The petitioners claimed that despite the injunction, the respondent illegally evicted them without recourse to law. The respondent filed an affidavit in reply stating that after the decree in RCS No.674/1993, he filed Regular Civil Suit No.780 of 1994 on 21.7.1994. The petitioners appeared in that suit and after negotiations, they voluntarily handed over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises to the respondent on 23.12.1995 by presenting a pursis in RCS No.780/1994. The Court observed that these events were not disclosed in the contempt petition. The Court held that since the possession was given voluntarily pursuant to a settlement and the petitioners suppressed material facts, no case of contempt was made out. The contempt petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Wilful Disobedience of Injunction - Permanent Injunction - The petitioners alleged that the respondent violated a permanent injunction dated 18.11.1994 in RCS No.674/1993 by dispossessing them. However, the respondent contended that the petitioners voluntarily handed over possession on 23.12.1995 pursuant to a settlement in RCS No.780/1994. The Court held that since the petitioners suppressed these material facts and the possession was given voluntarily, no contempt was made out. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondent's taking possession of the suit premises after the petitioners voluntarily handed over possession pursuant to a settlement in a subsequent suit amounts to wilful disobedience of the permanent injunction granted in the earlier suit.
Final Decision
The contempt petition is dismissed. The Court held that no case of contempt is made out as the possession was given voluntarily by the petitioners pursuant to a settlement in a subsequent suit, and the petitioners suppressed these material facts.
Law Points
- Contempt of court
- wilful disobedience
- permanent injunction
- voluntary surrender of possession
- settlement between parties
- suppression of material facts
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (02) 186
Contempt Petition No.291 of 1996
None for Petitioner; Ms Sushama Joshi i/b Smt. A.R.S. Baxi for Respondent
Sou. Nirmala Chandrashekar Madki and Chandrashekhar Annarao Madki
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience of a permanent injunction order.
Remedy Sought
The petitioners sought action for contempt against the respondent for flouting the permanent injunction dated 18.11.1994 passed in Regular Civil Suit No.674 of 1993.
Filing Reason
The petitioners alleged that the respondent illegally evicted them from the suit premises despite a permanent injunction restraining him from dispossessing them.
Previous Decisions
The 5th Joint C.J.S.D., Solapur decreed Regular Civil Suit No.674 of 1993 on 18.11.1994 granting a permanent injunction against the respondent. Subsequently, the respondent filed Regular Civil Suit No.780 of 1994, and the petitioners voluntarily handed over possession on 23.12.1995.
Issues
Whether the respondent's taking possession of the suit premises after the petitioners voluntarily handed over possession pursuant to a settlement in a subsequent suit amounts to wilful disobedience of the permanent injunction granted in the earlier suit.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners: The respondent illegally evicted them despite a permanent injunction dated 18.11.1994 in RCS No.674/1993.
Respondent: The petitioners voluntarily handed over possession on 23.12.1995 pursuant to a settlement in RCS No.780/1994, and the contempt petition suppressed these facts.
Ratio Decidendi
A contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience of an injunction must fail if the alleged contemnor obtained possession pursuant to a voluntary settlement and the petitioner suppressed material facts regarding the subsequent suit and handover of possession.
Judgment Excerpts
This contempt petition alleges that the learned 5th Joint C.J.S.D. Solapur had decreed Regular Civil Suit No. 674 of 1993 vide his judgment and order dated 18.11.1994 and inspite of permanent restraining order from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit premises, the defendant i.e. present respondent illegally and without recourse to law had evicted the petitioners.
The respondent-alleged contemnor has filed affidavit in reply and stated that after Regular Civil Suit No. 674 of 1993 was decreed, he filed Regular Civil Suit No. 780 of 1994 on 21.7.94 and on issuance of the summons on the present petitioner No.2, he had appeared before the trial Court and the petitioner No.1 had filed her written statement.
Finally they presented pursis in Regular Civil Suit No. 780 of 1994 and handed over the vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises to the respondent on 23.12.1995.
Procedural History
The 5th Joint C.J.S.D., Solapur decreed Regular Civil Suit No.674 of 1993 on 18.11.1994 granting a permanent injunction. The respondent filed Regular Civil Suit No.780 of 1994 on 21.7.1994. The petitioners appeared and after negotiations, they voluntarily handed over possession on 23.12.1995. The present contempt petition was filed in 1996.
Acts & Sections
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971:
