Contempt application alleging sale deed executed despite an interim order restraining transfer of suit property. Court held Section 52 TPA governs validity of such sale and no willful interference with justice arose; invoking Section 13(a), it dismissed the application.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:120580
Court No. - 1
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4487 of 2024
Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Opposite Party :- Smt Neelam Counsel for Applicant :- Amul Kumar Tyagi,Ankur Tyagi,Santosh Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
Heard the counsel for the applicant.
The present contempt application has been filed pleading the willful disobedience of the order dated 12.12.2022 passed by this Court in Second Appeal No. 1058 of 2022.
Through the aforesaid order, the Court had restrained the parties from changing the nature and possession of the suit property and also from creating third party rights in the same.
The applicant pleads that the opposite party has committed contempt of court by executing a sale deed in favour of the certain persons which is clearly in violation of the orders passed by this Court.
The validity of the sale deed is dependent on the operation of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The act of the opposite party does not by itself sustainability interfere nor does it tend to interfere with the course of justice.
The order passed by this Court can be a ground for the applicant to oppose impleadment of the opposite parties in the second appeal. It is not the case of the applicant that either the nature of the property or possession of the property has been changed by the vendor.
It is not a case for proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 in view of Section 13(a).
The application is dismissed .
Order Date :- 29.7.2024 Satyam
Digitally signed by :- SATYAM AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether execution of a sale deed contrary to an interim order restraining change of possession or third-party rights constitutes contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mukesh Kumar
Smt Neelam
Salil Kumar Rai
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
