LawforAll

▼
Showing posts with label contempt of court. Show all posts
Showing posts with label contempt of court. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 4, 2014

Contempt of Court - suit for declaration of their title and permanent injunction- compromise decree with some of the defendants - when patwari and Thasildar entered the name of non-compromised party defying the compromise decree - not amounts to wilful disobedience of court order and not amount to contempt of court = Nafis Ahmad & Another ... Petitioners versus Narain Singh & Others ... Respondents = 2014( February part) judis.nic.in/supreme court/filename=41197

›
Contempt of Court - suit  for  declaration  of  their  title  and  permanent  injunction-   compromise decree with some of the defendants -...
Friday, October 11, 2013

Contempt of Court = Bonafide mistake in not furnishing the required information T.C.GUPTA & ANR Vs. HARI OM PRAKASH & ORS. published in judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=40876

›
       Bonafide mistake in not furnishing the required information to the High Court may not amount to contempt of court  - Apex court set ...
Thursday, May 9, 2013

contempt of court = Neither the High Court nor the Magisterial Court have ever applied their mind and considered the conduct of the respondent and continuance of criminal proceedings in respect of the disputes, which are civil in nature and finally adjudicated by the competent authority i.e. the Company Law Board and the High Court in appeal. We are of the definite opinion that the complainant has manipulated and misused the process of Court so as to deprive the appellants from their basic right to move free anywhere inside or outside the country. Moreover, it would be unfair if the appellants are to be tried in such criminal proceedings arising out of alleged breach of a Joint Venture Agreement specially when such disputes have been finally resolved by the Court of competent jurisdiction. Hence, allowing the criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.7 of 2007 to continue would be an abuse of the process of the Court and, therefore, for the ends of justice such proceedings ought to be quashed. Since the High Court failed to look into this aspect of the matter while passing the impugned order, in our opinion, the same could not be sustained in law. Although we do not appreciate the action of a senior Superintendent of Police, but in view of the order passed in these appeals, we do not want to proceed any further in Contempt Petition (C) No.166 of 2013, which stands disposed of.

›
Page 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL/CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.__4540________OF 2013 [Arising ...