Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
Provisions considered
Judgment
Through: Mr. S.C. Singhal, Adv. Versus N.S. BHATIA & ORS. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Anupam Sharma, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW %
O R D E R 22.09.2016 IA No.14472/2014 (of the defendants under Order XXXIX Rule 2A)
The defendants in this disposed of suit have filed this application averring non-compliance by the plaintiff of the order dated 30th April, 2008 and in terms whereof the suit also was disposed of on 2nd April, 2009.
The counsel for the plaintiff / non-applicant has referred to Kanwar Singh Saini Vs. High Court of Delhi (2012) 4 SCC 307 to contend that the application is not maintainable and the remedy if any of the defendants / applicants is of execution.
The counsel for the defendants / applicants states that they had earlier filed Contempt Case (C) No.887/2009 which was dismissed as non- maintainable relying on Bimal Chandra Sen Vs. Kamla Mathur 22 (1982) DLT 33 (DB) holding that provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 are not applicable where the remedy of Order XXXIX Rule 2(A) CPC is available. CS(OS) 924/2004
The counsel for the defendants / applicants states that he would like to look up the law before opting for execution.
List on 27th October, 2016. SEPTEMBER 22, 2016 „gsr‟.. RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J CS(OS) 924/2004
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.