Dismissed

Raj Kumar Garg through Lrs v. Rahul Bhandari and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Sept 2024COCP/1577/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of an earlier writ order regarding payment of monetary benefits was not pressed after the respondents released Rs.8,50,000 and supplied a detailed calculation of benefits payable. The court dismissed the petition but allowed the petitioner to challenge the calculations by representation.

What the court decided

AI extract

Raj Kumar Garg through Lrs Vs Rahul Bhandari and… — Contempt of Court | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

205 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

COCP-1577-2020 Date of Decision: September 09, 2024

¶3

RAJ KUMAR GARG THROUGH LRS ........Petitioner Versus RAHUL BHANDARI AND OTHERS ........Respondents

¶4

........Respondents

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

¶6

Present: M r. Deepak Malhotra, Advocat e for the petitioner. M r. Athar Ahmed, DAG, Punja b . M r. Sameer Sachdeva, Advoc a te for respondent Nos.3 & 4. ****

¶7

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

¶8

B y way of present petition filed under Sections 10 read wit h Section 12 of t he Contempt of Courts Act, 1 9 71, prayer has been made fo r initiation of c ontempt proceedings again s t the respondent for willfu l disobedience o f order dated 08.11.2019 pass e d by this Court in CWP-11438 - 2011.

¶9

Learned counsel for the respond e nts submits that Rs.8,50,000/ - has been rele a sed in favour of the petitioner. He further informs that detaile d calculation wit h regard to the benefits paya b le to the petitioner has bee n supplied to t h e learned counsel represe n ting the petitioner and th e compliance st a nds made.

¶10

In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioner doe s not press the present petition.

¶11

Di s missed as not pressed. H o wever, the petitioner shall b e at liberty to challenge th e calculations s ubmitted by the respondents by making a detaile d representation within a period of two wee k s from today which shall b e considered and decided by respondents w ithin a period of four week s thereafter and r esponse thereof shall be conv e yed to the petitioner within tw o weeks.

¶12

09.09.2024 Tejwinder	(	HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE
	Whether speaking/reasone d	Yes/No
	Whether Reportable	Yes/No

¶13

TEJWINDER SINGH 2024.09.11 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Raj Kumar Garg through Lrs v. Rahul Bhandari and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Raj Kumar Garg through Lrs v. Rahul Bhandari and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandeep Singh Vs Gaurav Yadav, Ips, Dgp,Punjab and Anr.

Mohd. Afsar and Ors. Vs Sh. Vineet Garg

Krishan Singh Walia Vs Krishan Kumar

M/S Asis Builders Vs Ajoy Sharma and Others

Rajpal Singh Vs Abhishek Sharma

Karan Vir Singh and Others Vs Ajoy Kumar Sinha etc.