URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE REAL ESTATE FUND versus DHARMESH S. JAIN AND ANR.

URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE REAL ESTATE FUND versus DHARMESH S. JAIN AND ANR.

The Court held that the respondents willfully disobeyed the High Court order dated 08.08.2019 and this Court's order dated 28.10.2021 (and had taken benefit of extensions granted by the courts), that their belated plea of financial inability lacked bonafides, and that contempt jurisdiction could be invoked notwithstanding executability of the award; accordingly the respondents were guilty of civil contempt and liable to be punished.

Parties
Award Creditor / Petitioner: Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund; Respondents / Alleged Contemnors: Dharmesh S. Jain and Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Contempt Petition (c) No. 940 of 2021 / Disposed
Outcome
Respondents held guilty of civil contempt; contempt petition disposed of; respondents to be heard on sentence.
Legal Topics
Civil Contempt, Wilful Disobedience, Stay of Arbitral Award, Deposit Condition, Execution of Arbitral Award, Contempt Jurisdiction
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Civil Contempt Wilful Disobedience Stay of Arbitral Award Deposit Condition Execution of Arbitral Award Contempt Jurisdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund

Award Creditor / Petitioner

Dharmesh S. Jain and Anr.

Respondents / Alleged Contemnors

Procedural Posture

Contempt Petition (c) No. 940 of 2021 / Disposed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-deposit of amount as condition of stay of an arbitral award constitutes civil contempt of court
  2. 2 Whether contempt jurisdiction can be invoked notwithstanding that the order/decree may be executable under law
  3. 3 Whether the respondents' plea of financial inability to comply was bona fide

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the respondents willfully disobeyed the High Court order dated 08.08.2019 and this Court's order dated 28.10.2021 (and had taken benefit of extensions granted by the courts), that their belated plea of financial inability lacked bonafides, and that contempt jurisdiction could be invoked notwithstanding executability of the award; accordingly the respondents were guilty of civil contempt and liable to be punished.

Court Disposition

Respondents held guilty of civil contempt; contempt petition disposed of; respondents to be heard on sentence.

Orders

  • Contempt Petition disposed of