Dismissed¶11

Krishna Kumar and Another v. Arun Kumar and 5 Others

Allahabad HC19 Feb 2025CAPL/469/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt Application Civil 469 of 2025; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Manish Kumar J; decided 19.2.2025; NC 2025:AHC-LKO:10698; Krishna Kumar v. Arun Kumar; non-compliance of interim order dated 02.12.2024 in Writ B No. 1174 of 2024; no third party rights; no alienation; no change in revenue records; hindrance/interference in possession; dismissed as not pressed; liberty to apply in pending writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Contempt application dismissed as not pressed at the applicants' own request, with the position preserved that the applicants may move an appropriate application for further interim relief in the pending writ petition (Writ B No. 1174 of 2024); no separate order passed. ¶11

Krishna Kumar and Another Vs Arun Kumar and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether the opposite parties committed contempt by violating the interim order dated 02.12.2024 passed in Writ B No. 1174 of 2024, i.e., by creating third-party rights, alienating or changing the nature of the property, or changing the revenue records.

¶6

Court's answer

This Court dismissed the present contempt application as not pressed and left the applicants free to move an appropriate application in the pending writ petition, no separate order being required.

¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt Application (CIVIL) No. 469 of 2025 (High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench; Manish Kumar, J.; order dated 19.2.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:10698). The applicants (Krishna Kumar and another) alleged non-compliance by the opposite parties (Arun Kumar and 5 others) of the judgment and order dated 02.12.2024 passed in Writ B No. 1174 of 2024, whose interim provision restrained the parties from creating third-party rights and from changing the property 'either by alienation or by changing in the revenue records'. Counsel for the applicants additionally alleged hindrance/interference in the applicants' possession. Asked specifically, counsel conceded that the respondents had neither created any third-party right nor changed the nature of the property or the revenue records. Counsel then sought withdrawal of the application as not pressed, with liberty to seek further interim relief if aggrieved by future actions not protected by the writ Court's interim order. The Court dismissed the contempt application as not pressed and observed that the applicants may move an appropriate application in the pending writ petition, no separate order being required. No statutory provisions or precedents were cited.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10698

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 469 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Krishna Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- Arun Kumar And 5 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

The present contempt application has been preferred for alleged non compliance of the judgment and order dated 02.12.2024 passed in Writ B No. 1174 of 2024. The relevant extract of the same is quoted hereinbelow:-

¶7

"As an interim measure, it is provided that no third party rights will be created by the parties in respect of the property in question nor its nature shall be changed either by alienation or by changing in the revenue records."

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the respondent nos. 1 to 6 are creating hindrance/interference in the possession of the applicants.

¶9

On being asked from the learned counsel for the applicant that whether the respondents had created any third party right in respect of the property in question or changed the nature of the property either by alienation or by changing in the revenue records, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the respondents have not acted against the interim order passed by the writ Court as they had not created the third party right. They had also neither changed the nature of the property nor there is any change in the revenue records.

¶10

After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants may be permitted to withdraw the present contempt application as dismissed as not pressed with liberty to move further interim relief application, if he is aggrieved by any further action of the respondents, which is not protected by the writ Court by its interim order.

¶11

In view of above, the present contempt application is dismissed as not pressed and it is always for the applicants to move an appropriate application in the pending writ petition for which no separate order is required to be passed.

¶12

Order Date :- 19.2.2025 Nitesh

¶13

Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Krishna Kumar and Another v. Arun Kumar and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Kumar and Another v. Arun Kumar and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anoop Kumar Sharma Vs Santosh Sinha, Unit Head (M) Iti Ltd. Gonda and Another

Prem Lata Vs Sanjay Kumar Mishra Executive Officer Nagar Palika Parishad Gonda and 2 Others

Shailendra Pratap Singh and Another Vs Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Ltd. and Others

X Rape Victim of Crime No. 250 /2021 Thru. Her Mother vs Sri Surya Pal Gangwar, Chairman District Steering Committee / D.M., Lucknow

Arvind Kumar vs Anupma Srivastava, Sub Divisional Officer, Hardoi

Akhilesh Bahadur Singh vs Sri B.L Mina, Prin. Secy. Cooperative Deptt. Lko. and Others