Contempt applications alleging disobedience of an interim injunction were dismissed after the opposite party explained that third-party rights were not created over the specific plots despite revenue recording errors.
Petitions dismissed; notices discharged.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 59
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 958 of 2018
Applicant :- Ramveer Singh Opposite Party :- Kaptaan Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Tripathi
AND
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2010 of 2018
Applicant :- Ramveer Singh Opposite Party :- Balram Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri S.R. Sharma who has appeared for the opposite party and has also filed an affidavit in these proceedings.
This petition has alleged disobedience of an interim injunction restraining the parties from creating any third party right over the land in question. This interim injunction was issued in a pending writ petition.
Shri Sharma, learned counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to the averments taken in paragraph 13 of the affidavit tendered today to submit that no third party rights or equitable mortgages have been created over khasra No. 535, 596 or 964B. He submits that in the relevant revenue records inadvertently a mortgage was shown to have been created against some of the plots which stand recorded in the name of the applicant. This mistake Shri Sharma seeks to explain in light of the certificate issued by the State Bank of India which clearly states that while recording the mortgage of plot Nos. 853 and 1002/1, certain other plots were wrongly mentioned and that no loans have been taken or equitable mortgage created over the plots upon which the applicant claims rights. The opposite party
lastly discloses that he has availed a credit facility from the bank and in respect of which an equitable mortgage has been created over plot Nos. 853 and 1002/1.
In view of the disclosures so made, the Court finds no ground to continue these proceedings in contempt.
The petitions shall stand dismissed. The notices are discharged.
Order Date :- 16.5.2018 nethra
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt proceedings should be continued given the explanation regarding wrongly recorded mortgage in revenue records.
Ramveer Singh
Yashwant Varma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
