Delhi High Court - Orders
M/S Somani Worsted Limited & Ors vs Aez Infratech Private Limited & Ors on 26 February, 2021
Author: Vibhu Bakhru
Bench: Vibhu Bakhru
$~26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 74/2019
M/S SOMANI WORSTED LIMITED & ORS...... Decree Holders
Through Mr Vivek Kohli, Senior Advocate with
Mr Malin Talwar, Mr Yeshi Rinchhen,
Ms Pankhuri Jain, Ms Kanika Saran, Ms Nikita
Maheshwari, Advocates.
versus
AEZ INFRATECH PRIVATE
LIMITED & ORS. ..... Judgement Debtors
Through Mr Praveen Kumar, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
ORDER
% 26.02.2021
CCP (O) 34/2020
1. The Decree Holders have filed the present contempt petition, inter alia, praying that contempt proceedings be initiated against the alleged contemnors for wilful violation of the orders of this Court.
2. It is the Decree Holder's case that orders passed by this Court directing the Judgment Debtors to truly disclose their assets have been violated. In particular, the learned counsel appearing for the Decree Holders has referred to the order dated 09.01.2020 whereby Judgment Debtors were granted further two weeks time to file their affidavits of assets as on the date of the beginning of the cause of action, date of the award as well as on the date of the order. The said affidavits were directed to be affirmed in Form Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWAL 16A, Appendix-E, under Order XXI Rule 41(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The relevant extract of the said order is set out below:-
"4. In the interest of justice, two weeks time is granted to the judgement debtors to file the affidavit of their assets on the date of the beginning of the cause of action, date of the award as well as on today in Form 16A, Appendix-E under Order XXI Rule 41(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure within two weeks failing which judgement debtor No. 3 as well as all the Directors of judgment debtor Nos. 1 and 2 shall be detained in civil prison for three months upon deposit of subsistence charges by the decree holder.
5. Judgement Debtor No. 1 and 2 are directed to file an additional affidavit in the format attached as Annexure- B to the judgement dated 05th December, 2019 in Ex.P.No.275/2012 titled Bhandari Engineers and Builders Pvt. Ltd. V. Maharia Raj Joint Venture within two weeks.
6. Judgment Debtor No. 3 is directed to file an additional affidavit in the format attached as Annexure- A to the judgement dated 05th December, 2019 in Ex.P.No.275/2012 titled Bhandari Engineers and Builders Pvt. Ltd. V. Maharia Raj Joint Venture within two weeks.
7. The judgment debtors are directed to file an additional affidavit to disclose the utilization of the amount advanced by the decree holder to the judgment debtors along with proof of utilization including the bank statements etc. within two weeks."
3. Although, the Judgment Debtors filed the affidavits in terms of paragraph no. 4 and 6 of the order dated 09.01.2020 but they did not comply with the directions as contained in Paragraph 5 and 7 of the said order.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWALAccordingly, on 14.02.2020 the Judgment Debtors were granted ten days time to comply with the said order dated 09.01.2020.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the Judgment Debtors states that the said orders were complied with. He further submits that the present execution petition is not maintainable as the award sought to be enforced is not stamped maintainable. He further contends that since the award is not stamped this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the said petition.
5. The said contention is wholly bereft of any merit. The question whether this Court has jurisdiction to enforce an arbitral award has little relevance as to the court's the jurisdiction to initiate contempt proceedings for wilful violation of its orders. The question in this petition is limited to examining whether the Judgment Debtors have wilfully violated the orders of this Court or have wilfully filed false affidavits before this court. This Court being a Court of Record has the jurisdiction in terms of Article 215 of the Constitution of India to take the necessary proceedings in this regard.
6. This Court is of the view that it is not necessary to examine whether the arbitral award is adequately stamped in these proceedings because as noticed above, the issue to be examined in this petition is limited to whether the Judgment Debtors have wilfully violated the orders of this Court and are liable to be proceeded against for the same. The merits of the execution petition are thus not relevant insofar as this petition is concerned. It is well settled that the matter of contempt is one that relates to administration of justice. It is essentially between the contemnors and the court; the petitioner is only a realtor party.
7. It is the Decree Holder's contention that the affidavits filed by the Judgment Debtors are patently false. Judgment Debtor No.3, in particular, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWAL has filed an affidavit affirming that he did not have any immovable property on the three dates, that is, on the date of cause of action, date of the beginning of the cause of action; date of the award; and the date of the order passed by this Court on 09.10.2019. It is pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Decree Holder that the said affidavit is patently false as would be evident by other documents annexed with the application, EA No. 101/2021, which, prima facie, indicates that Judgment Debtor No.3 not only owned and possessed immovable property on the dates in question, but had also transacted with the same. He referred to sale deeds dated 11.03.2014 which pertain to an agricultural land located in New Delhi.
8. He submitted that although the said property is described as agricultural land, in fact, it is a farmhouse located in one of the well sought for localities in Delhi (Vasant Kunj). It is also pointed out that the said agricultural land has been transferred in the name of two companies for consideration which ex-facie appears to be too inadequate. More importantly, the said two companies - (i) Alluvion Infracon Private Limited and (ii) Maravilloso Realty Private Limited are related parties. The shareholding pattern of the said companies indicates that almost entire capital is held by a family trust of Judgment Debtor No.3.
9. From the facts as stated above, prima facie, it does appear that there is merit in the contentions that Judgment Debtor No.3 has wilfully affirmed a false affidavit. However, the learned counsel appearing for the Judgment Debtors is correct in his submissions and the Judgment Debtors ought to be given an opportunity to deal with the documents as annexed in the EA No. 101/2021 as well as in EA No. 1114/2021, which are referred by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWAL10. In view of the above, the notice is issued in the aforementioned applications EA 101/2021 and EA 1114/2021. The learned counsel for the Judgment Debtors accepts notice.
11. The Judgment Debtors shall file their response to the applications specifically dealing with the documents annexed with the said applications, within a period of two weeks from today. Rejoinder, if any, be filed within a period of one week thereafter.
12. List on 06.04.2021.
13. The Judgment Debtor no.3 and all the directors of Judgment Nos. 1 and 2 were directed to be present in Court, however, they have violated the said direction. They shall be present in Court on the next date of hearing.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J FEBRUARY 26, 2021 pkv Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DUSHYANT RAWAL