Case Note & Summary
The case involves a family dispute over land Gut No.84. The appellants (Vijaykumar and Anilkumar Kucheriya) filed Regular Civil Suit No.250 of 2015 for injunction claiming partition and allotment of the land. The suit was dismissed on 11.02.2020. The appellants appealed in Regular Civil Appeal No.29 of 2020. During the appeal, the respondent (Sushilkumar Kucheriya) filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC for injunction, which was allowed on 14.07.2022, restraining the appellants from creating third party interests in the suit land. Allegedly, in defiance, appellant No.2 executed two sale deeds on 18.07.2022 and appellant No.1 executed two sale deeds on 19.07.2022. The respondent filed Civil M.A. No.92 of 2022 under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC for breach. The trial court on 03.04.2025 imposed civil imprisonment for one month. The appellants appealed against this order, and the respondent filed a cross objection seeking enhancement. The High Court heard both sides. The appellants argued no willful disobedience, claiming the order was not served and they had no knowledge. The respondent argued deliberate breach. The court found that the appellants had knowledge of the order as they were present in court on 14.07.2022 and the order was passed in their presence. The sale deeds were executed immediately after, showing willful disobedience. The court upheld the punishment of one month imprisonment, finding it proportionate, and dismissed the cross objection for enhancement. The court emphasized that breach of injunction is a serious matter and mens rea is established by the timing and circumstances.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Breach of Injunction - Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC - Willful Disobedience - The appellants, despite being restrained by an injunction order dated 14.07.2022 from creating third party interests in suit land, executed four sale deeds on 18.07.2022 and 19.07.2022. The court held that the breach was willful and deliberate, as the appellants had knowledge of the order and acted in defiance. The punishment of one month civil imprisonment was upheld, and the cross objection for enhancement was dismissed as the sentence was proportionate. (Paras 1-10)
B) Civil Procedure - Mens Rea in Contempt - Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC - The court examined whether the disobedience was willful, noting that the appellants had notice of the order and still executed sale deeds. The court found that the appellants' conduct demonstrated a clear intention to violate the court's order, rejecting the defense that the order was not served or that the deeds were executed before knowledge. (Paras 5-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellants committed willful disobedience of the injunction order dated 14.07.2022 by executing sale deeds, and whether the punishment of one month civil imprisonment under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC is justified.
Final Decision
Appeal from Order No.17 of 2025 is dismissed; Cross Objection Stamp No.13511 of 2025 is dismissed. The order dated 03.04.2025 imposing one month civil imprisonment is upheld.
Law Points
- Willful disobedience of injunction order
- Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC
- Civil imprisonment
- Breach of court order
- Mens rea in contempt
Case Details
2025 LawText (BOM) (12) 288
Appeal from Order No.17 of 2025 with Civil Application No.4669 of 2025 and Cross Objection Stamp No.13511 of 2025
Mr. Milind M. Patil (Beedkar) for appellants, Mr. P. V. Sonpethkar for respondent
Vijaykumar S/o Basantilal Kucheriya and Anilkumar S/o Basantilal Kucheriya
Sushilkumar S/o Parasmal Kucheriya
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal against order imposing civil imprisonment for breach of injunction under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC.
Remedy Sought
Appellants sought setting aside of the punishment order; respondent sought enhancement of punishment.
Filing Reason
Alleged willful disobedience of injunction order by executing sale deeds despite restraint.
Previous Decisions
Trial court dismissed suit on 11.02.2020; appellate court granted injunction on 14.07.2022; trial court imposed one month civil imprisonment on 03.04.2025.
Issues
Whether the appellants committed willful disobedience of the injunction order dated 14.07.2022?
Whether the punishment of one month civil imprisonment under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC is justified?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellants argued no willful disobedience, claiming order was not served and they had no knowledge.
Respondent argued deliberate breach as sale deeds were executed immediately after the order.
Ratio Decidendi
Willful disobedience of an injunction order under Order 39 Rule 2-A CPC is established when the party has knowledge of the order and deliberately acts in contravention. The punishment of civil imprisonment is proportionate to the gravity of the breach.
Judgment Excerpts
Appellants are taking exception to the judgment and order dated 03.04.2025 passed in Civil M. A. No. 92 of 2022 awarding punishment of civil imprisonment for one month under Order 39 Rule 2-A of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The self same order has been challenged by the respondent seeking enhancement of punishment by way of cross objection.
The parties are related inter-se. The subject matter is land Gut No.84.
Appellants had filed Regular Civil Suit No. 250 of 2015 for injunction contending that there was partition in the family and they were allotted land Gut No.84.
The Trial Court dismissed the suit on 11.02.2020.
Before the Appellate Court, respondent submitted application Exhibit 12 for injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC.
After hearing the parties on 14.07.2022, application Exh.12 was allowed restraining present appellants from creating any third party interest in the suit land admeasuring 2H. 6R.
It is contended by the respondent that in defiance of the order, appellant No.2 executed two sale deeds on 18.07.2022 and appellant No.1 executed two sale deeds on 19.07.2022, which amounted to breach of injunction.
Learned counsel Mr. Milind Patil Beedkar appearing for the appellants submits that there is no willful disobedience on part of the appellants and they were not liable for the penalty.
Procedural History
Regular Civil Suit No.250 of 2015 filed by appellants for injunction, dismissed on 11.02.2020. Appeal filed as Regular Civil Appeal No.29 of 2020. During appeal, respondent obtained injunction on 14.07.2022. Appellants allegedly breached by executing sale deeds. Respondent filed Civil M.A. No.92 of 2022 under Order 39 Rule 2-A. Trial court imposed one month civil imprisonment on 03.04.2025. Appellants filed Appeal from Order No.17 of 2025; respondent filed Cross Objection Stamp No.13511 of 2025. High Court heard and dismissed both on 24.12.2025.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order 39 Rule 1, Order 39 Rule 2, Order 39 Rule 2-A
