Disposed

Robkar v. Bal Krishan, Additional Registrar Cooperative Societies Jammu

J&K HC2 Sept 2026ROBSW/6/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court closed contempt and review proceedings after the respondent deposited the disputed Provident Fund amount into the petitioner's account. The liquidator undertook to refund and re-deposit before the Commissioner within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings closed; rule discharged; review petition dismissed upon undertaking to refund and redeposit funds.

Robkar Vs Bal Krishan, Additional Registrar Cooperative Societies Jammu — J&K HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Sr. No. 03

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU

¶3

ROBSW No. 6/2026 in CCP (S) No. 376/2023 c/w CCP (S) No. 376/2023

¶4

Robkar …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)

¶5

Through: Mr. Sandeep Singh, Advocate

¶6

¶7

Bail Krishan, Additional Registrar Cooperative Societies Jammu

¶8

.…. Respondent(s)

¶9

Through: Mr. Adarsh Bhagat, GA

¶10

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

¶11

ORDER 02.09.2026

¶12

CCP (S) No. 376/2023

¶13

1. It has been brought to the notice of this Court by Mr. Sandeep Singh learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the respondents have deposited the CPF amount to the tune of Rs. 8.50 crore in the account of the petitioner, whereas, in terms of the order/judgment dated 22.08.2023 passed by the learned Writ Court, the said amount was to be deposited before respondent No. 3-Commissioner Provident Fund, provided there was no other legal impediment. Learned counsel appearing on behalf petitioner fairly admits that the said amount, though required to be deposited before respondent No. 3, has been deposited in his account. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the judgment has not been complied with in toto. The respondent/contemnor, who is present

¶14

in person, is not averse to depositing the amount in question before

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

respondent No. 3-Commissioner Provident Fund provided the petitioner is willing to refund the aforesaid amount from the same account from which the said amount was credited, i.e., liquidator’s account. In the event that the amount is credited back to the account of the liquidator, the liquidator/contemnor herein shall comply with the order/judgment passed by the learned Writ Court in its letter and spirit and deposit the CPF before respondent No. 3-Commissioner Provident Fund, strictly in tune with the order/judgment passed by the learned Writ Court, within three weeks from today.

¶17

2. The liquidator undertakes that subject to the amount being credited back to the account of the liquidator, the liquidator shall deposit the same in terms of the order/judgment dated 22.08.2023 passed by the learned Writ Court before respondent No. 3-Commissioner Provident Fund, within a period of three weeks from today.

¶18

3. Thus, in the light of the respective statements made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and also by Mr. Bal Krishan, liquidator, who is present in person before this Court and is the contemnor herein, no fruitful purpose would be served to keep this contempt petition alive. Accordingly, the proceedings in the instant contempt petition are closed. Rule, if any, shall stand discharged. However, it is made clear that in case the order/judgment dated 22.08.2023 along with the order passed by this Court today is not complied with within the period granted by this Court, the petitioner shall be at liberty to revive the instant contempt petition and, in that eventuality, the Court will be constrained to take coercive measures against the respondents.

¶19

ROBSW No. 6/2026 c/w CCP(S) No. 376/2023

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

4. The instant contempt is disposed of.

¶22

ROBSW No. 6/2026

¶23

5. Since the main contempt petition has been disposed of today and a detailed order has been passed, which forms part of the Robkar proceedings as well and no fruitful purpose would be served to keep the Robkar alive, as the order/judgment dated 22.08.2023 passed by the learned Writ Court stands complied with. Therefore, the proceedings in the instant Robkar are also closed in the light of the detailed order passed in the instant contempt petition.

¶24

6. Accordingly, the proceedings in the Robkar are closed.

¶25

7. The personal presence of liquidator is dispensed with.

¶26

(Wasim Sadiq Nargal) Judge Jammu 02.09.2026 Nikhil

¶27

ROBSW No. 6/2026 c/w CCP(S) No. 376/2023

¶28

Page 3 of 3

Robkar v. Bal Krishan, Additional Registrar Cooperative Societies Jammu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Robkar v. Bal Krishan, Additional Registrar Cooperative Societies Jammu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases