Disposed

Shailesh Panday v. Shinde Deepak Arjun

Delhi HC1 Oct 2018CONT.APP.(C)/11/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi disposed of a contempt appeal as not pressed for hearing. The appellant had argued maintainability based on costs imposed by the Single Judge. The Bench allowed withdrawal of the appeal, leaving the appellant to seek waiver of costs by an application in the disposed petition, without deciding merits or maintainability.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of as not pressed; appellant permitted to withdraw with right to seek waiver of costs via application in the disposed petition.

Shailesh Panday Vs Shinde Deepak Arjun — Contempt of Court | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~25.

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CONT.APP.(C) 11/2018 and CM APPL. Nos.40635-636/2018

¶4

SHAILESH PANDAY ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Yadunandan Bansal and Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

SHINDE DEEPAK ARJUN ..... Respondent Through: Mr. G.D. Mishra, Advocate.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

¶9

O R D E R % 01.10.2018

¶10

The present appeal has been filed by the appellant, who is aggrieved by an order dated 14.09.2018, passed by the learned Single Judge in CONT. CAS(C) 698/2018 entitled Shailesh Panday Vs. Shinde Deepak Arjun.

¶11

We may note that by the impugned order dated 14.09.2018, learned Single Judge has dismissed the Contempt Case filed by the appellant, while imposing costs of Rs.20,000/- on him. It is also noteworthy that when the present appeal was filed by the appellant, the Registry had raised an objection with regard to its maintainability and the only explanation offered by learned counsel for the appellant was that costs of Rs.20,000/- have been imposed on the appellant and therefore the Contempt Appeal is maintainable.

¶12

Page 1 of 2

¶13

CONT.APP.(C) 11/2018

¶14

In view of the provisions of Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, we have requested learned counsel for the appellant to address us on the maintainability of the present appeal, keeping in mind the judicial dicta declared by the Supreme Court in A.I.R. 2015 S.C. 1831 entitled Sujitendra Nath Singh Roy v. State of West Bengal.

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellant states that he may be permitted to withdraw the present appeal while reserving the right of the appellant to take his chances before the learned Single Judge by filing an application in the disposed of Contempt Petition for seeking waiver of the costs imposed.

¶16

The appeal is disposed of as not pressed alongwith the pending applications. If the appellant files an application for seeking waiver of the costs imposed vide order dated 14.09.2018, it shall be for him to persuade the learned Single Judge to entertain such an application. We make it clear that no observations have been made on the merits of the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

¶17

HIMA KOHLI, J

¶18

REKHA PALLI, J

¶19

OCTOBER 01, 2018 na

¶20

Page 2 of 2

¶21

CONT.APP.(C) 11/2018

Shailesh Panday v. Shinde Deepak Arjun

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailesh Panday v. Shinde Deepak Arjun

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naveen Kumar Yadav Vs Union of India and Ors.

Kuldeep Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.

The Director (Rl) and Ors. Vs Santosh Kumar Upadhyay

S.K. Chaudhary Vs Union of India and Ors.

Rajender Arya Vs Rejistrar Cooperative Socity NCT Delhi and Anr.

Union of India Vs Randeep Singh and Ors.