The court dismissed a contempt petition alleging violation of an interim order. The court held that construction did not constitute alienation, transfer of interest, dealing with or encumbrance as defined in the order.
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.
10.03.2023 SL No.1 Court No.8
CRC 6 of 2023 (CPAN 679 of 2022) In FMA 803 of 2022
Jnanbhusan Saha & Anr. Vs. Muslam Sekh & Ors.
Ms. Sima Ghosh,
…for the applicants.
Mr. Tapan Kr. Mukherjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. Pinaki Dhole,
…for the alleged contemnors.
Mr. Mukherjee, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the alleged contemnors submits that the alleged contemnors are personally present in Court. However, there has been no violation of the order passed by this Bench on 10th May, 2022. Our attention is drawn to the portion of the order where we restrained the respondents from dealing with the properties. The relevant portion of the said order is set out hereinbelow:-
“However, for the time being, there shall be an interim order restraining the respondents from dealing with, alienating and/or encumbering the suit property for a period of eight weeks or until further order, whichever is earlier.”
Mr. Mukherjee further submits that there is no order restraining the alleged contemnors from making any construction. It is submitted that the photographs annexed to the contempt application would not show that the alleged contemnors have violated the aforesaid order.
2
Ms. Sima Ghosh, learned Advocate representing the applicants has submitted that making construction on the suit property would be a violation of the interim order passed by us as it amounts to alienation. We are unable to accept the said submission. The alienation would mean transfer of interest in the property. Admittedly the applicants are unable to demonstrate that the alleged contemnors have dealt with, alienate and/or encumber the suit property.
Under such circumstances, the contempt application being CRC 6 of 2023 (CPAN 679 of 2022) stands dismissed.
Rule stands discharged.
(Sugato Majumdar, J.)
(Soumen Sen, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether making construction on suit property amounts to violation of interim order restraining alienation or dealing with property.
Jnanbhusan Saha & Anr.
Muslam Sekh & Ors.
Sugato Majumdar
Soumen Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
