The petitioners sought initiation of contempt proceedings for alleged wilful disobedience of a prior settlement order regarding a share in assets. The court held the petition misconceived as it could not adjudicate the emotional conduct between family members and dismissed the petition.
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.
$~63
RAMINDER SINGH & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Anibhav Ramakrishna, Ms. Anjali Chauhan, Mr. Harshit Pandey, Advs.
versus
SURENDER PAL SINGH & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rajat Wadhwa, Mr. Gurpreet Singh and Ms. Divya Kanwar, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA
DHARMESH SHARMA, J. (ORAL)
“iii. The father has also agreed that if his son and his family, treat him and his wife in a proper manner and do not resort to illtreatment, the father would be willing to agree for a substantial share (1/3rd) of his assets to go to the son and his family. However,
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PRAMODCONT.CAS(C) 1439/2024 Page 1 of 2 KUMAR VATS Signing Date:11.09.2024 17:48:14
the same shall be fully dependent on the treatment meted out by the son’s family to the parents.”
DHARMESH SHARMA, J.
SEPTEMBER 10, 2024 sa
Signature Not Verified
CONT.CAS(C) 1439/2024 Page 2 of 2
Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD KUMAR VATS Signing Date:11.09.2024 17:48:14
1 issue framed by the court
Whether there was willful disobedience of the court's directions dated 06.02.2023 by the respondents.
Raminder Singh
Surender Pal Singh
Dharmesh Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Proceedings for wilful disobedience of a court order under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
