High Court

1. Shri Asif Naseem Shah on behalf of the respondents has filed a para- wise reply to the application filed by the applicant for punishing the contemnor for disobedience of the order dated 30.01.2025, which is taken on record.

2. In the present contempt application on 30.01.2025 the following order has been passed which is quoted herein-below:- "Case has been called in the revised list. Learned counsel for the applicant is present and has submitted that on 21.03.2025, the Court has directed for the presence of respondent. For convenience, the order dated 21.03.2025 is quoted herein-below:- " 1. This contempt application has been filed for non-compliance of the undertaking given by opposite party in pursuance of order dated 23.5.2023 to vacate the premises in question by 1.2.2024.

2. This Court, by order dated 7.2.2024, issued notices and as per the record, on 29.5.2024, vakalatnama was filed by Mohd. Tanveer, Advocate on behalf of the opposite party. Thereafter, an illness slip was sent by Mohd. Tanveer, Advocate on 8.1.2025. Again, Mohd. Tanveer did not appear before this Court and the matter was adjourned on 16.1.2025.

3. Today when the case was called out, one Shri Abhishek Singh, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party after taking No Objection Certificate from Mohd Tanveer, Advocate. The same is taken on record.

4. From the facts, as recorded in the orders passed by this Court, it is apparent that opposite party is trying to delay the proceedings.

5. List this matter on 30.1.2025.

6. On the next date of listing, opposite party shall remain present in person before this Court to explain how and why the undertaking given by opposite party, in pursuance of order dated 23.5.2024, has not been complied with." Sri Asif Naseem Shah, the respondent is present and has handed over key of the shop to the applicant no. 1 i.e. Sri Naveen Dhan Das Gupta, who is also present in the Court. Learned counsel for the respondent prays for and is granted four weeks' time for payment of arrears of rent, taxes and other dues pertaining to the premises, in question. List this case in the week commencing 03.03.2025. The respondent is directed to file compliance affidavit by the next date of listing, failing which he shall appear before this Court for the purposes of framing of charges."

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that before this Court the key was handed over by the respondent to the applicant but when the applicant reached at the shop for the purpose of opening lock he found that some new lock was put by removing old lock, the key of which was provided to the applicant before this Court in the present contempt proceedings.

4. It is further submitted that the certain persons who are not identifiable who were in the lawyers dress were surrounded the shop and forcing the applicant not to break the locks. In this regard a supplementary affidavit has been filed on 04.02.2025 enclosing therein the photographs of the new lock in place of old lock and the persons in lawyers' dress around the shop.

5. The respondent while filing the reply to the said affidavit has submitted that he has not changed the lock, he had given the key of the same lock which was there on the shop. It is the applicant who has called the unidentified people who were in lawyers' dress to pressurize the respondent to open the lock.

6. The said argument and submission made by learned counsel for the respondent is frivolous for the reason that when the keys were handed over to the applicant by the respondent before this Court then why the applicant could call the persons for the opening of the lock, if any persons were called it might be by the respondent so the lock could not be opened. The lock has also been changed and if not changed then the keys of some other locks were given before this Court.

7. The learned counsel for the respondent has further submitted that there was a co-tenant Mohd. Aalim Khan, the partner of the respondent, he had already moved an application in the execution case on 22.7.2024 under Order 21 Rule 99 C.P.C. and this fact has been concealed by the applicant. Even this submission and argument by the learned counsel for the respondent is unbelievable for the reason before the Small Causes Court where the suit for eviction was filed the respondent was the only party and he had never come with a case that there was some co-tenant in the said shop who is the partner of the respondent. The case was decided against the respondent, against which the appeal was filed by the respondent alone not by his so called partner cum co-tenant as it has been mentioned for the first time before this Court by filing the present application. Even in the writ petition filed by the respondent it was nowhere mentioned that there is some co-tenant or partner of the respondent in the shop, so this is also an after thought just to retain possession of the shop. This is nothing but a wilful and intentional disobedience of the orders passed by the Writ Court and misleading the Court while handing over the keys of some other lock which was not at the shop.

7. In view of the facts and circumstances discussed above, the respondent has played fraud with the Court and abuse the process of the Court and willfully and intentionally disobeyed the order passed by the Court.

8. In the aforesaid circumstances, a case under Rule 5 of Chapter XXXV-E of Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 (Rules framed under Section 23 of Contempt of Courts Act, 19071) is made out, accordingly the following charge is being framed against the respondent- Asif Naseem Shah:- "Why contemnor- respondent be not punished for wilful and deliberate disobedience of the judgement and order dated 23.05.2023 passed in Petition No. A-227 No. 2666 of 203 (Asif Naseem Shah Vs. Additional District Judge/ Fast Track (1), Lucknow & others)".

9. The respondent- Asif Naseem Shah is granted two weeks' time to file reply to the aforesaid charge.

10. List this case on 24.03.2024.

11. On that date, the respondent shall appear in person.

2. No reply to the aforesaid charge is filed by the respondent - Asif Naseem Shah but he filed affidavit stating therein that Rs.10,000/- has already been paid to the applicants and handed over the keys to the applicant - Mr. Naveen Dhan Das Gupta, S/o Late Girish Dhan Das Gupta R/o 116/108, Ghasiyari Mandi, Kaiserbagh, Lucknow (Mobile No.9389970794).

3. Put up tomorrow, i.e., 25.3.2025 at 11:30 A.M.

4. On the next date, applicant no.1 as well as respondent shall again appear before this Court."

2. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, applicant no. 1 as well as respondent are present before this Court and are identified by their counsel. Applicant no. 1 categorically states before this Court that the possession has already been taken by him, but rest of the rent amounting to Rs.84,500/- has not been paid.

3. The respondent prays for two months' time to pay the aforesaid amount of Rs.84,500/- to the applicant.

4. List this case on 21.07.2025.

5. By the next date of listing, the respondent shall file affidavit of compliance with the averment that the aforesaid amount is paid to the applicant, failing which, he shall appear before this Court for framing of charges."

2. Learned counsel for the respondent/ opposite party is reported to be ill while Mr. Asif Naseem Shah S/o Mohd Naseem R/o 474/44 Sitapur Road Rooppur Khadra Mashalchi Tola Nirala Nagar, Lucknow, Mobile No.9919399658 is present and he requested that due to ill health the money in question could not be arranged and he requested for some time to pay the aforesaid amount.

3. List this case on 04.08.2025 at 11:30 A.M.

4. On the next date of listing, the respondent shall again appear before this Court alongwith the draft of Rs.40,000/-, failing which, the charge shall be framed against him. Order Date :- 21.7.2025 Mohd. Sharif

1. Shri Asif Naseem Shah on behalf of the respondents has filed a para- wise reply to the application filed by the applicant for punishing the contemnor for disobedience of the order dated 30.01.2025, which is taken on record.

2. In the present contempt application on 30.01.2025 the following order has been passed which is quoted herein-below:- "Case has been called in the revised list. Learned counsel for the applicant is present and has submitted that on 21.03.2025, the Court has directed for the presence of respondent. For convenience, the order dated 21.03.2025 is quoted herein-below:- " 1. This contempt application has been filed for non-compliance of the undertaking given by opposite party in pursuance of order dated 23.5.2023 to vacate the premises in question by 1.2.2024.

2. This Court, by order dated 7.2.2024, issued notices and as per the record, on 29.5.2024, vakalatnama was filed by Mohd. Tanveer, Advocate on behalf of the opposite party. Thereafter, an illness slip was sent by Mohd. Tanveer, Advocate on 8.1.2025. Again, Mohd. Tanveer did not appear before this Court and the matter was adjourned on 16.1.2025.

3. Today when the case was called out, one Shri Abhishek Singh, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party after taking No Objection Certificate from Mohd Tanveer, Advocate. The same is taken on record.

4. From the facts, as recorded in the orders passed by this Court, it is apparent that opposite party is trying to delay the proceedings.

5. List this matter on 30.1.2025.

6. On the next date of listing, opposite party shall remain present in person before this Court to explain how and why the undertaking given by opposite party, in pursuance of order dated 23.5.2024, has not been complied with." Sri Asif Naseem Shah, the respondent is present and has handed over key of the shop to the applicant no. 1 i.e. Sri Naveen Dhan Das Gupta, who is also present in the Court. Learned counsel for the respondent prays for and is granted four weeks' time for payment of arrears of rent, taxes and other dues pertaining to the premises, in question. List this case in the week commencing 03.03.2025. The respondent is directed to file compliance affidavit by the next date of listing, failing which he shall appear before this Court for the purposes of framing of charges."

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that before this Court the key was handed over by the respondent to the applicant but when the applicant reached at the shop for the purpose of opening lock he found that some new lock was put by removing old lock, the key of which was provided to the applicant before this Court in the present contempt proceedings.

4. It is further submitted that the certain persons who are not identifiable who were in the lawyers dress were surrounded the shop and forcing the applicant not to break the locks. In this regard a supplementary affidavit has been filed on 04.02.2025 enclosing therein the photographs of the new lock in place of old lock and the persons in lawyers' dress around the shop.

5. The respondent while filing the reply to the said affidavit has submitted that he has not changed the lock, he had given the key of the same lock which was there on the shop. It is the applicant who has called the unidentified people who were in lawyers' dress to pressurize the respondent to open the lock.

6. The said argument and submission made by learned counsel for the respondent is frivolous for the reason that when the keys were handed over to the applicant by the respondent before this Court then why the applicant could call the persons for the opening of the lock, if any persons were called it might be by the respondent so the lock could not be opened. The lock has also been changed and if not changed then the keys of some other locks were given before this Court.

7. The learned counsel for the respondent has further submitted that there was a co-tenant Mohd. Aalim Khan, the partner of the respondent, he had already moved an application in the execution case on 22.7.2024 under Order 21 Rule 99 C.P.C. and this fact has been concealed by the applicant. Even this submission and argument by the learned counsel for the respondent is unbelievable for the reason before the Small Causes Court where the suit for eviction was filed the respondent was the only party and he had never come with a case that there was some co-tenant in the said shop who is the partner of the respondent. The case was decided against the respondent, against which the appeal was filed by the respondent alone not by his so called partner cum co-tenant as it has been mentioned for the first time before this Court by filing the present application. Even in the writ petition filed by the respondent it was nowhere mentioned that there is some co-tenant or partner of the respondent in the shop, so this is also an after thought just to retain possession of the shop. This is nothing but a wilful and intentional disobedience of the orders passed by the Writ Court and misleading the Court while handing over the keys of some other lock which was not at the shop.

7. In view of the facts and circumstances discussed above, the respondent has played fraud with the Court and abuse the process of the Court and willfully and intentionally disobeyed the order passed by the Court.

8. In the aforesaid circumstances, a case under Rule 5 of Chapter XXXV-E of Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 (Rules framed under Section 23 of Contempt of Courts Act, 19071) is made out, accordingly the following charge is being framed against the respondent- Asif Naseem Shah:- "Why contemnor- respondent be not punished for wilful and deliberate disobedience of the judgement and order dated 23.05.2023 passed in Petition No. A-227 No. 2666 of 203 (Asif Naseem Shah Vs. Additional District Judge/ Fast Track (1), Lucknow & others)".

9. The respondent- Asif Naseem Shah is granted two weeks' time to file reply to the aforesaid charge.

10. List this case on 24.03.2024.

11. On that date, the respondent shall appear in person.

2. No reply to the aforesaid charge is filed by the respondent - Asif Naseem Shah but he filed affidavit stating therein that Rs.10,000/- has already been paid to the applicants and handed over the keys to the applicant - Mr. Naveen Dhan Das Gupta, S/o Late Girish Dhan Das Gupta R/o 116/108, Ghasiyari Mandi, Kaiserbagh, Lucknow (Mobile No.9389970794).

3. Put up tomorrow, i.e., 25.3.2025 at 11:30 A.M.

4. On the next date, applicant no.1 as well as respondent shall again appear before this Court."

2. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, applicant no. 1 as well as respondent are present before this Court and are identified by their counsel. Applicant no. 1 categorically states before this Court that the possession has already been taken by him, but rest of the rent amounting to Rs.84,500/- has not been paid.

3. The respondent prays for two months' time to pay the aforesaid amount of Rs.84,500/- to the applicant.

4. List this case on 21.07.2025.

5. By the next date of listing, the respondent shall file affidavit of compliance with the averment that the aforesaid amount is paid to the applicant, failing which, he shall appear before this Court for framing of charges."

2. Learned counsel for the respondent/ opposite party is reported to be ill while Mr. Asif Naseem Shah S/o Mohd Naseem R/o 474/44 Sitapur Road Rooppur Khadra Mashalchi Tola Nirala Nagar, Lucknow, Mobile No.9919399658 is present and he requested that due to ill health the money in question could not be arranged and he requested for some time to pay the aforesaid amount.

3. List this case on 04.08.2025 at 11:30 A.M.

4. On the next date of listing, the respondent shall again appear before this Court alongwith the draft of Rs.40,000/-, failing which, the charge shall be framed against him. Order Date :- 21.7.2025 Mohd. Sharif