The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed a contempt application, holding that alleged violations of an earlier order constitute a fresh cause of action to be pursued independently. The case was closed without prejudice to other reliefs.
The case closed without prejudice to other reliefs the Petitioner may seek in the appropriate jurisdiction.
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.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Contempt Case (Civil) No. 204 of 2017
Kartik Ram S/o Ganpat Lal aged about 50 years R/o Nehru Chowk Camp 1 Near Sinha Cycle Store Bhilai District Durg Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioner
Versus
S.K.V. Deshpande Principal B.S.P. High School Camp 1 Bhilai District Durg Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent
For Petitioner : Shri H.B. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Preeti Yadav, Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri P. Sam Koshy, Judge.
Order on Board
Per Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, Chief Justice
01/05/2017
1. This application styled as one seeking invocation of the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act is instituted as if the actions attributed to the Respondent amount to violation of the terms of Annexure C/1, which itself is an order issued in jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act. Through that order, quietus was sought to be obtained in relation to the dispute between the employees and the management of a particular school. The Petitioner complains that now the management is proceeding to take such action, as it would result in violation of the terms of Annexure C/1, and therefore, Annexure C/3 compliant has been placed.
2. In this view of the matter, any subsequent action, after discharging the terms of Annexure C/1 may generate only an independent and fresh cause of action and even if there is any violation of directions contained in Annexure C/1, that has to be agitated independently, to seek relief from appropriate jurisdiction. It cannot be treated as a cause of action which would generate proceedings for
2
alleged Contempt of Courts Act in the first instance.
3. We therefore close this contempt of court case without prejudice to any other reliefs that the Petitioner may seek from in appropriate jurisdiction in accordance with law.
Sd/Sd/(Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan) (P. Sam Koshy) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
Anu
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a complaint alleging violation of an earlier order can be treated as a cause of action for contempt proceedings.
Whether subsequent actions based on such a complaint generate an independent cause of action.
Whether this contempt case needs to be disposed of or remanded to appropriate jurisdiction.
Kartik Ram S/o Ganpat Lal
S.K.V. Deshpande
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan
P. Sam Koshy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
