Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, D. Chandrasekaran, represented by his power agent A. Dakshnamoorthy, filed two contempt petitions. The first, Cont.P.No.1723 of 2025, was against Mrs. J. Flora, the judgment debtor, for allegedly willfully disobeying a prohibitory order dated 21.11.2023 passed in E.P.No.1781 of 2022 in O.S.No.4194 of 2019 by the IX Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. The second, Cont.P.No.1724 of 2025, was against Govindaraj and Preetha, Sub Registrars of Virugambakkam, for allegedly willfully disobeying a communication order dated 26.09.2024 in the same execution proceedings. The background is that the petitioner had obtained a decree for recovery of Rs.25,30,000/- against Mrs. J. Flora in O.S.No.4194 of 2019, decreed on 25.11.2019. In execution, the court passed a prohibitory order under Order 21 Rule 54 CPC on 21.11.2023, restraining the judgment debtor from transferring or charging the property. Subsequently, on 26.09.2024, the court issued a communication order to the Sub Registrar, Virugambakkam, informing them of the prohibitory order. The petitioner alleged that the judgment debtor alienated the property after the prohibitory order and that the Sub Registrars failed to act on the communication order. The court examined the nature of the prohibitory order under Order 21 Rule 54 CPC and held that it does not create a charge on the property; it merely prohibits the judgment debtor from transferring or charging the property. The court found that the judgment debtor had already executed a sale deed prior to the prohibitory order, and thus there was no willful disobedience. Regarding the Sub Registrars, the court held that the communication order is only for information and does not require any action from them. The Sub Registrars are not bound by the prohibitory order unless the property is attached. Therefore, no contempt was made out against either the judgment debtor or the Sub Registrars. The court dismissed both contempt petitions, noting that the petitioner may pursue other remedies available under law.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Willful Disobedience - Prohibitory Order Under Order 21 Rule 54 CPC - The court examined whether the judgment debtor's alienation of property after a prohibitory order amounted to contempt. Held that a prohibitory order under Order 21 Rule 54 CPC does not create a charge on the property and only prohibits the judgment debtor from transferring or charging the property. Since the judgment debtor had already executed a sale deed prior to the prohibitory order, there was no willful disobedience. (Paras 5-8) B) Contempt of Court - Willful Disobedience - Communication Order Under Order 21 Rule 54 CPC - The court considered whether the Sub Registrars were guilty of contempt for not complying with a communication order. Held that the communication order is only for information and does not require the Sub Registrar to take any action. The Sub Registrars are not bound by the prohibitory order unless the property is attached. Therefore, no contempt was made out. (Paras 9-12) C) Civil Procedure Code - Order 21 Rule 54 - Prohibitory Order - Nature and Effect - The court clarified that a prohibitory order under Order 21 Rule 54 CPC is a direction to the judgment debtor not to alienate the property, but it does not create a charge or lien on the property. The order is only binding on the judgment debtor and not on third parties like the Sub Registrar unless the property is attached. (Paras 5-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment debtor and the Sub Registrars are guilty of contempt for willfully disobeying the prohibitory order dated 21.11.2023 and the communication order dated 26.09.2024 passed by the execution court.
Final Decision
Both contempt petitions are dismissed. The court held that there was no willful disobedience of the prohibitory order or the communication order. The petitioner is at liberty to pursue other remedies available under law.
Law Points
- Prohibitory order under Order 21 Rule 54 CPC does not create a charge on property
- Sub Registrar not bound by prohibitory order unless property is attached
- Contempt requires willful disobedience
- Communication order under Order 21 Rule 54 CPC is only for information
- No contempt for non-compliance of communication order
