Contempt petition alleging non-compliance with five undertakings given under Section 138 NI Act proceedings to pay Rs. 90 Lacs. Since the parties entered into a Settlement Agreement dated 27 September 2022 and separate proceedings for its compliance had been initiated, the court disposed of the contempt petition without passing any orders.
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.
$~20
RAJESH MEHROTRA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. M.N. Dudeja, Mr. Aditya Mishra, Advocates
versus
GAGAN DUGGAL ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Yash Prakash, Advocate along with respondent-in-person (M:9811130245)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA
O R D E R % 08.01.2024
MINI PUSHKARNA, J
JANUARY 8, 2024/ au
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/05/2024 at 16:01:27
1 issue framed by the court
Whether orders were required in a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with undertakings to pay Rs. 90 Lacs, in view of a subsequent settlement agreement between the parties.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajesh Mehrotra
Gagan Duggal
Mini Pushkarna
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
