Court No. - 10
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 5228 of 2019 Applicant :- Amit Sachan Opposite Party :- Awadhesh Kumar Tiwari, D.M. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Gupta
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard Sri V.K.Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vishnu Gupta, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Rafeek Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 4.
The applicant is before this Court for a direction to initiate contempt proceedings against the opposite parties for willful disobedience of the interim order dated 12.4.2016 passed in Writ B No. 16375 of 2016 (Amit Sachan Vs. Board of Revenue Allahabad And 8 Others).
At the very outset, Sri Vishnu Gupta, learned Senior Advocate raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the present contempt application as has been framed and drawn precisely on the ground that the applicant had moved an application under Section 143 of Z.A.Act for declaration of his land as abadi and the said application was allowed. Contesting opposite party had filed an appeal, which was rejected by the Collector vide order dated 28.4.1992. Against the said order, a revision was filed, which was also rejected by the Commissioner Jhansi Division, Jhansi vide order dated 7.4.1994, against which a second revision was preferred by the contesting opposite party before the Board of Revenue Allahabad, which was allowed vide order dated 28.2.2014. Against the said order, the aforementioned writ petition was preferred before this Court. Therefore, now, by means of the present contempt application, it has been alleged that the opposite party has forcefully dispossessed the applicant. This is also admitted situation that a civil suit for permanent injunction between the parties, is also pending consideration before the civil court and as such, in case, the applicant is aggrieved, the said situation can very well be examined and remedied by the civil court under Order XXXIX Rule 2A C.P.C. and on this factual ground, the present contempt application is liable to be dismissed.
Once the objection has been raised, the Court has proceeded to examine the record in question and finds nothing on record on indicate or suggest that the interim order so accorded by the Writ Court, has ever been extended and so far as the objection raised by Sri Vishnu Gupta definitely has force. In these circumstances, the Court finds no reason or occasion calling upon any proceeding against the opposite parties under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
The contempt application is totally misconceived and the same is accordingly rejected.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 A.K.Srivastava