Case Note & Summary
The complainant, D. Venkatesh, filed a contempt petition under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India, alleging willful disobedience of a judgment dated 06.09.2011 passed by the High Court of Karnataka in R.F.A. No.86/2009. The judgment had granted time to the tenant (the accused) to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the premises by December 2012. The complainant sought initiation of contempt proceedings and a consequential direction to the Executing Court to issue a delivery warrant. The accused were M.G. Deendayalan, M.G. Ramesh Babu, M.G. Murthy, and M.G. Rajan, all sons of Late M.G. Govindaraju, who were doing export garment business at the same address. The complainant and his mother were the landlords. The court examined the facts and noted that the accused had already vacated and handed over possession of the premises. The court observed that there was no willful disobedience of the judgment, as the order had been complied with. The court held that contempt proceedings are not maintainable when the order has been complied with and there is no mens rea. Accordingly, the contempt petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Willful Disobedience - Sections 2(b), 11, 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Article 215 of the Constitution of India - Complainant sought contempt proceedings against accused for alleged willful disobedience of judgment directing tenant to vacate by December 2012 - Court found that accused had already vacated and handed over possession, and there was no willful disobedience - Held that contempt proceedings are not maintainable when the order has been complied with and there is no mens rea (Paras 2-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the accused committed willful disobedience of the judgment dated 06.09.2011 in R.F.A. No.86/2009 by not vacating and handing over vacant possession by December 2012, and whether contempt proceedings should be initiated.
Final Decision
The contempt petition is dismissed as the accused had already vacated and handed over possession, and there was no willful disobedience of the judgment.
Law Points
- Contempt of Courts Act
- 1971
- Section 2(b)
- Section 11
- Section 12
- Article 215 of Constitution of India
- Willful disobedience
- Mens rea
- Compliance with judgment
- Vacant possession
Case Details
2018 LawText (KAR) (04) 15
C.C.C. No.1468/2017 (Civil)
B.S. Patil, S. Sunil Dutt Yadav
Sri V. Tarakaram, Senior Advocate for Sri K.M. Jaganath, Advocates (for complainant); Sri Mohamed Nasiruddin, Advocate (for accused)
M.G. Deendayalan, M.G. Ramesh Babu, M.G. Murthy, M.G. Rajan
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil contempt proceedings for alleged willful disobedience of a judgment in an eviction matter.
Remedy Sought
Initiation of contempt proceedings against the accused and a consequential direction to the Executing Court to issue a delivery warrant.
Filing Reason
Alleged failure of the accused to vacate and hand over vacant possession by December 2012 as directed by the judgment dated 06.09.2011 in R.F.A. No.86/2009.
Previous Decisions
Judgment dated 06.09.2011 in R.F.A. No.86/2009 granting time to the tenant to vacate and hand over vacant possession by December 2012.
Issues
Whether the accused committed willful disobedience of the judgment dated 06.09.2011 in R.F.A. No.86/2009.
Whether contempt proceedings should be initiated under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Submissions/Arguments
Complainant argued that the accused willfully disobeyed the judgment by not vacating and handing over possession by December 2012.
Accused contended that they had already vacated and handed over possession, and there was no willful disobedience.
Ratio Decidendi
Contempt proceedings are not maintainable when the order has been complied with and there is no willful disobedience or mens rea on the part of the alleged contemnor.
Judgment Excerpts
Complainant in the present proceedings has sought to initiate proceedings against respondents for willful disobedience of the judgment dated 06.09.2011 in R.F.A. No.86/2009, which had granted time to the tenant to vacate and hand over vacant possession by December 2012.
Relevant facts are as follows: Complainant and his mother...
Procedural History
The complainant filed CCC No.1468/2017 under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India, alleging willful disobedience of the judgment dated 06.09.2011 in R.F.A. No.86/2009. The petition was heard and reserved on 27.03.2018, and the order was pronounced on 20.04.2018.
Acts & Sections
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: 2(b), 11, 12
- Constitution of India: 215
