Disposed

Ramesh Chandra v. Sri Bhanu Chandra Goswami, the D.M. Allahabad

Allahabad HC10 Nov 2020CAPL/4342/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil contempt application, the court examined whether the respondent failed to comply with a previous writ order regarding a housing allotment complaint. Instead of immediately punishing, the court granted the respondent six weeks to comply while endorsing a verification procedure for court orders.

What did the court decide?

Granted the respondent six weeks to comply with the previous writ order; directed applicant to arrange service; respondent must intimate compliance.

Ramesh Chandra Vs Sri Bhanu Chandra Goswami, the D.M… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4342 of 2020 Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Opposite Party :- Sri Bhanu Chandra Goswami, The D.M. Allahabad Counsel for Applicant :- Shridhar Tripathi

¶3

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

¶5

By order dated 12.10.2017 passed in Writ C No.47825 of 2017 filed by the applicant, the Court directed as under:

¶6

"The petitioner contends that he was selected for consideration of being allotted a house under the Lohiya Avas Yojna. His further contention is that all other allottees are receiving money but the petitioner has not received any money. In this regard petitioner has made a complaint which is pending considering before District Magistrate.

¶7

In the light of the aforesaid, we dispose of the writ petition directing the authority concerned to decide the petitioner's complaint within six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order."

¶8

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.

¶9

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 within six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

¶10

The applicant shall supply a duly stamped registered envelope addressed to the opposite party and another selfaddressed 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.

¶11

The opposite party shall comply with the directions of the writ court and intimate him of the order through the selfaddressed envelop within a week thereafter.

¶12

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.

¶13

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioners alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶14

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶15

Order Date :- 10.11.2020 RKP

Ramesh Chandra v. Sri Bhanu Chandra Goswami, the D.M. Allahabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Chandra v. Sri Bhanu Chandra Goswami, the D.M. Allahabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satyendra Goswami @ Kishan Vs Principal Judge, Family Court, Allahabad and Another

Manju Yadav Vs Smt. Vineeta Yadav, Examination Controller, Prof. Rajendra Singh (Rajju Bhaiya) University

Ratan Singh Vs Ekta Singh, S.D.M. and 2 Others

Hriday Narayan Shukla and 3 Others Vs Shri. Dev Pratap Singh, Special Secretary ( Basic Education), Govt of U.P.

Vyash Verma Vs Abdul Rehman Farooqui, S.D.O.

Rajkumar Gangwar Vs Sri. Venkateshwar Lu I.A.S. Principal Secretary, Irrigation , Govt U.P. and Another