Allahabad High Court
Santosh And Another vs Krishna Nand And Another on 11 May, 2023
Author: Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
Bench: Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:101842 Court No. - 7 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1646 of 2010 Applicant :- Santosh And Another Opposite Party :- Krishna Nand And Another Counsel for Applicant :- S.K.S. Kushwaha,Krishna Ji Khare Counsel for Opposite Party :- Shiv Bahadur Singh,K.S.Tewari,S.C. Dubey,Vivek Tiwari Along with Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4689 of 2009 Applicant :- Santosh And Another Opposite Party :- Phulel Counsel for Applicant :- S.K.S. Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- Shiv Bahadur Singh,S.C. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
1. Chinta Mani and Phulel are present in the Court, who are identified by Sri S.B.Singh, counsel for the opposite party.
2. Counsel for opposite party contends that the applicant had assailed the judgment and orders dated 17.04.2008 and 31.03.2006 before the writ Court through Writ ? B No.36537 of 2008. During the pendency of the writ petition interim order was granted. The present contempt proceedings arises for violation of the interim order.
3. According to the learned counsel, the writ petition was decided finally on 26.9.2022 and the writ Court while allowing the matter had remanded back the matter to the Court of Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Vindhyachal Region, Mirzapur or any other Court who was competent to hear and decide Appeal No.276 of 2006 which was filed under Section 331(3) of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. Pursuant to the remand order passed by the writ Court, the appeal filed by the applicant has been dismissed on 13.03.2023.
4. Counsel for the opposite party states that as the writ petition was allowed and the matter was remitted back to the Court below pursuant to which the appeal has been decided, no case for contempt is made out.
5. Sri K.S.Kushwaha, counsel appearing for the applicant states that in view of judgment of Apex Court, the contempt proceedings would continue against the opposite party for violation of interim order passed by writ Court during pendency of writ petition.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
7. It is not in dispute that the writ petition filed by the applicant was allowed by writ Court vide order dated 26.9.2022 and the matter was remitted back to the Appellate Court which had finally decided the lis between the parties on 13th March 2023 and once the matter has attained finality, no occasion arises for continuing with the contempt proceedings against the opposite party.
8. Seeing the fact that the dispute is going on between the brothers, no occasion arises to continue with the contempt proceedings as the matter has already attained finality.
9. Both the contempt applications stand dismissed.
10. Contempt notice stands discharged.
Order Date :- 11.5.2023 Kushal