Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Divya Sharma vs Rahul Bhargava on 12 January, 2022

Author: Najmi Waziri

Bench: Najmi Waziri

                              $~11(1)
                              *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                              +      CONT.CAS(C) 836/2021
                                     DIVYA SHARMA                                         ..... Petitioner
                                                        Through:      Ms. Priya Hingorani, Senior
                                                                      Advocate with Dr. Aman Hingorania
                                                                      and Mr. Himanshu Yadav, Advocates.

                                                        versus

                                     RAHUL BHARGAVA                                    ..... Respondent
                                                 Through:             Mr. Deepak Bhargava, Father of
                                                                      Respondent.

                                     CORAM:
                                     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
                                                  ORDER

% 12.01.2022 The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.

1. Albeit, notice was accepted on behalf of the respondent by his father Mr. Deepak Bhargava, who is the former's power of attorney holder, no response has been filed. There is nothing to show as to why the respondent cannot appear before the court, through counsel. He is stated to have some medical conditions; the details of the medical conditions are not on record. The contempt petition at (Pdf p.57) shows that the respondent was working as Finance Manager (a senior administrative position) at the Boulia Shire Council.

2. Ms. Hingorani, the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner submits that to the best of information available, the respondent's monthly salary was about Rs.4 lacs. It is on the basis of this information that a Signature Not Verified Digitally signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:15.01.2022 18:34:02 maintenance order was passed on 23.08.2019 directing the respondent to pay Rs. 80,000/- per month to the petitioner. No monies have been paid till date.

3. The respondent is stated to have taken loans from financial institutions for purchase of properties in India, which were purchased in the name of his parents. Some of the said properties have been disposed-off, possibly, to defeat the very of the objective of the order.

4. The respondent had challenged the maintenance order on grounds of maintainability before the Supreme Court but received a prompt dismissal of his SLP.

5. The respondents' appeal against the aforesaid order of maintenance is pending before the learned Sessions Judge. The maintenance order continues even today and the respondent is in evident contempt for non-compliance.

6. No reply of the respondents is on record. He seeks one last opportunity to file a reply.

7. Prima facie, the court is of the view that the respondent has committed contempt of court.

8. Issue notice to the respondent to show cause as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against him for having committed contempt of the court's directions under ss. 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

9. Compliance- affidavit/reply be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder, if any, be filed before the next date. The respondent would always have the right to to pursue such remedies as may be available to him in law.

10. Renotify on 30.03.2022.

11.The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.

NAJMI WAZIRI, J JANUARY 12, 2022/dss Signature Not Verified Digitally signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:15.01.2022 18:34:02