HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY C.C.No.960 of 2014 Date : 28-8-2014 Between:
Buddhadeb Bakshi and another .. Petitioners And Ms. Tabassum Saleem, Secunderabad and others .. Respondents Counsel for petitioner : Sri G. Rama Gopal Counsel for respondents :
The Court made the following :
ORDER:
This Contempt Case is filed alleging wilful disobedience of order dated 12-10-2011 in WPMP No.34375 of 2011 in W.P.No.27875 of 2011.
By the above mentioned order, this Court has directed that the contemnors herein “shall not encumber Flat Nos.301, 302 and 401 in the premises bearing No.1-8-50 6/20, Plot No.20 (SSV Residency), Prakash Nagar, Begumpet, Hyderabad, to third parties”. In the Contempt Case, the petitioners have alleged that despite the said order, the contemnors have inducted third parties as tenants besides allowing the service provider of a mobile company to erect a tower over the property.
At the hearing, Sri G. Rama Gopal, learned Counsel for the petitioners, argued that the word “encumber” includes inducting of third parties as tenants.
In broad legal parlance, the submission of the learned Counsel may be correct. In fact, the above mentioned order was passed considering the prayer in WPMP No.34375 of 2011, which is as under :
“Petition under Section 151 of C.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in the W.P. the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents 3 to 6 not to alienate or create any third party interest or any encumbrance over the Flat Nos.301, 302 and 401 in the premises of SSV Residency, 1-8-50 6/20, Plot No.20, Prakash Nagar, Begumpet, Hyderabad, pending WP No.27875 of 2011 on the file of the High Court.”
In the context in which this Court has passed the order, the word “encumber” was used in a limited sense, in that, the respondents shall not create third party rights by way of alienation of the property. In this view of the matter, I do not find that the respondents have committed contempt of the order of this Court.
The Contempt Case is accordingly dismissed.
As a sequel to the dismissal of the Contempt Case, Contempt Application No.583 of 2014 is dismissed as infructuous.
Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy Date : 28-8-2014 AM