Court No. - 10
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4555 of 2019 Applicant :- Vijay Sharma Opposite Party :- Smt. Kinjal Singh, Vice Chairman, Kanpur Development Authority Counsel for Applicant :- Rajan Tripathi
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
The impleadment application filed today on behalf of Bhajan Lal Ardas, son of Maiku Lal and Om Prakash, son of Basant Lal, is allowed. Let necessary impleadment be carried out forthwith.
In response of the order of this Court dated 25.7.2019, Shri Pradeep Kumar Tripathi, Advocate appearing for the opposite party has placed the instructions dated 14.8.2019 sent by the Executive Engineer, Zone-4, Kanpur Development Authority, Kanpur, appending therewith the letter dated 24.9.2019 wherein it has been stated that in response of the writ court order, illegal possession has been removed on 14.8.2019 and the offer was made to the applicant to take over possession but he did not take possession on the said date.
Shri Yadavendra Dwivedi, Advocate appearing for the newly impleaded opposite parties apprises to the Court that there is serious dispute. The newly impleaded opposite parties are joint owners of the house. The ancestors had filed Original Suit No.287 of 1978 (Maikoo Lal and others vs. Kanpur Development Authority and others) for permanent injunction and the same was dismissed on 25.9.1981 by the Munsif Havali, Kanpur. However, a Civil Appeal No.695 of 1981 filed against the said order was allowed by the IIIrd Additional District Judge, Kanpur on 25.2.1983. A Writ-C No 14678 of 2013 (Akhilesh Kumar Vs State of U P) was filed before this Court and the same was disposed of by this Court on 3.7.2013. Again attempts were made by the Kanpur Development Authority in the months of December, 2015 and April, 2016 to demolish the house in question. Bhajan Lal approached this Court by preferring Writ C No.18775 of 2016 and the same was disposed of on 28.4.2016 with following observations:-
"At this stage, we are of the view that the ends of justice would be met if the second respondent is directed to consider the claim of the petitioner of being governed by the judgment of this Court dated 3 July 2013 in Writ-C No 14678 of 2013. The competent authority shall duly apply its mind to the nature and identity of the property which was the subject matter of the decree of the first appellate court dated 25 February 1983 which has been adverted to in the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 3 July 2013. The nature of the claim and the entitlement of the petitioner shall also be duly scrutinized and determined as to whether the petitioner is entitled to be protected in terms of the statement made on behalf of the Development Authority as referred to in the judgment of the Division Bench dated 3 July 2013.
We also clarify that should the petitioner be aggrieved thereafter, he would be at liberty to pursue his rights and remedies in accordance with law.
The petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs."
In such situation, Shri Rajan Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant states that till now the writ court order has not been complied with in letter and spirit and, thus, the opposite party has committed civil contempt liable for punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
No useful purpose would be served in keeping the contempt application pending. The grievance of the applicant must be redressed by the Competent Authority i.e. Vice Chairman, Kanpur Development Authority.
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 no.1 to comply with the aforesaid order of the Court and decide the claim of the applicant after affording opportunity of hearing to the newly impleaded opposite parties within three 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 no.1 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 no.1 within one week thereafter and keep a recorded thereof.
The opposite party no.1 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 no.1 within the stipulated time as aforementioned.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 RKP