Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.30 seconds)
Syeed Asima Ali vs Hockey India & Ors on 20 April, 2026 cites

Anil Ratan Sarkar & Ors vs Hirak Ghosh & Ors on 8 March, 2002

satisfied that the disobedience of the Court's order must be deliberate or contumacious. Judicial orders are to be properly understood and complied with, and even negligence and carelessness may amount to willful disobedience if the implications of the Court order are brought to the attention of the contemnor. Further, in Anil Ratan Sarkar v. Hirak Ghosh,17 it was, importantly, declared that misunderstanding or own understanding of Court orders is not a permissible defence against contempt action. When the Court order is clear and unequivocal, the same ought to be adhered to without any tinkering.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 217 - U C Banerjee - Full Document

Patel Rajnikant Dhulabhai & Anr vs Patel Chandrakant Dhulabhai & Ors on 21 July, 2008

59. The Court in Patel Rajnikant Dhulabhai v. Patel Chandrakant Dhulabhai,18 had held that while punishing a person for contempt of Court is a drastic step which should normally not be resorted to, there exists a duty on the Court to uphold and maintain its dignity and the majesty of law. If contempt action is required for the said purpose, Courts ought to exercise its powers under the Act.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 99 - C K Thakker - Full Document

T. N. Godavarman Thirumulpad Through ... vs Ashok Khot And Anr on 10 May, 2006

49. However, an oral apology has been tendered by Mr. Bhola Nath Singh, which the Court takes on record. The same is, however, found to be woefully inadequate. The facts and dates as narrated and emphasized above would indicate a complete lack of remorse on the part of Mr. Bhola Nath Singh which cannot be condoned by this Court. The Supreme Court, in T. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Ashok Khot and Anr.,10 has held that an apology is an act of contrition and regret, and ought to be tendered at the earliest possible opportunity. Similarly, in Anil Ratan Sarkar, the Supreme Court held that the belated apology tendered by the contemnors was a ‗tactful move' adopted when they were in a tight corner.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 103 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Ashok Paper Kamgar Union And Ors. vs Dharam Godha And Ors. [Alongwith ... on 5 September, 2003

In Ashok Paper Kamgar Union v. Dharam Godha,16 the Supreme Court has held that willful disobedience of a judicial order would mean any act or omission which is done voluntarily and intentionally and with the specific intent to do something the law forbids or with the specific intent to fail to do something the law requires to be done, that is to say with bad purpose either to disobey or to disregard the law. Whether or not the contemnor has in fact, willfully disobeyed the Court-order is to be decided taking into account the facts of each case.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 129 - G P Mathur - Full Document
1