Court No. - 10
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4844 of 2019 Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Opposite Party :- Nagendra Prasad Singh, Collector/ D.M.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Mishra Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
By order dated 22.1.2019 passed in Writ A No.2048 of 2019 filed by the applicant, the Court directed as under:
"When the petitioner's possession was being disturbed by the State of U.P. a suit being Suit No. 91/95 was filed by the petitioner in which issue no. 1 was framed as to whether the plaintiff (petitioner) was the owner in possession over the plot no. 740 situate in Village Narauli, Pargana Nizamabad, Tehsil Sadar, District Azamgarh area 3 acres 590 kari (1.453 hectares). Thereafter, when the issue was decided in favour of the petitioner, the suit for permanent injunction was decreed. Thereafter, the State of U.P. filed a First Appeal which came to be dismissed on 14.08.2012. The Special Leave Petition filed in the Supreme Court was also dismissed. In the meantime on 17.02.2011 a mutation case was sought to be restored and it was also subsequently restored.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the mutation Court was not deciding the the matter and was only lingering the same and this was resulting in a lot of harassment to the petitioner.
The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since there was a decree in favour of the petitioner the mutation Court should not have proceeded with the case at all and should have shelved the matter. However, since the mutation Court has restored the case and since the petitioner has also filed his objection it shall be in the fitness of things that the same may be decided within a period of two months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order. The petitioner's objection dated 27.06.2018 shall be definitely considered when the mutation case is decided.
The writ petition is disposed of."
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a certified copy of the aforesaid order was submitted for compliance before the opposite party but the opposite party has wilfully not complied with the order and, thus, has committed civil contempt liable for punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Prima facie a case of contempt has been made out. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, one more opportunity is afforded to the opposite party to comply with the aforesaid order of the Court, which was corrected on 30.1.2019, within four weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
The applicant shall supply a duly stamped registered envelope addressed to the opposite party and another self-addressed stamped envelope to the office within one week from today. The office shall send a copy of this order along with the self- addressed envelope of the applicant with a copy of contempt application to the opposite party within one week thereafter and keep a recorded thereof.
The opposite party shall comply with the directions of the writ court and intimate him of the order through the self-addressed envelop within a week thereafter.
With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of at this stage with liberty to the applicant to move a fresh application, if the order is not complied with by the opposite party within the stipulated time as aforementioned.
Order Date :- 22.8.2019 RKP