Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.33 seconds)The Contempt Of Courts Act, 1971
Section 12 in The Contempt Of Courts Act, 1971 [Entire Act]
Smt. Indu Tewari vs Ram Bahadur Chaudhari And Ors. on 7 May, 1981
In Smt. Indu Tewari v. Ram Bahadur Choudhary, 1981 AWC 521 it has been held that under such circumstances it would not be a proper exercise of discretion on the part of the High Court to exercise its jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act when such an effective and alternative remedy is available to any person.
Section 10 in The Contempt Of Courts Act, 1971 [Entire Act]
Food Corporation Of India vs Sukh Prasad on 24 March, 2009
In the case of Food Corporation of India Vs. Sukh Deo Prasad 2009(3) SC 2330 and Kanwar Singh Saini v. High Court of Delhi, (2012) 4 SCC 307 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the power exercised by a Court under Order 39 Rule 2-A of the Code is punitive in nature, akin to the power to punish for civil contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and such powers are to be exercised with great caution and responsibility and in case a final order order the decree lies in execution and not in an action of contempt or disobedience and in case of breach of temporary injunction, the remedy is available under Order XXXIX Rule 2A which is punitive nature, akin to the power to punish for civil contempt under 1971 Act.
Kanwar Singh Saini vs High Court Of Delhi on 23 September, 2011
In the case of Food Corporation of India Vs. Sukh Deo Prasad 2009(3) SC 2330 and Kanwar Singh Saini v. High Court of Delhi, (2012) 4 SCC 307 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the power exercised by a Court under Order 39 Rule 2-A of the Code is punitive in nature, akin to the power to punish for civil contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and such powers are to be exercised with great caution and responsibility and in case a final order order the decree lies in execution and not in an action of contempt or disobedience and in case of breach of temporary injunction, the remedy is available under Order XXXIX Rule 2A which is punitive nature, akin to the power to punish for civil contempt under 1971 Act.
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Dayachand Porte vs Kamlabai 14 Fam/58/2012 Ashok Kumar ... on 19 April, 2018
The instant contempt petition has been filed for violation of the order dated 11.1.2017 passed in Second Appeal No. 12 of 2017 (Dayachand vs. Devendra Singh and 2 others), whereby, parties are directed to maintain status quo. Applicant is the appellant in the appeal. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the opposite parties therein are making constructions on the disputed plot.