PALLAV SHETH versus CUSTODIAN AND ORS.

PALLAV SHETH versus CUSTODIAN AND ORS.

Action for contempt must be initiated by filing an application or the court issuing suo motu notice within one year from date of contempt, but in cases of fraud, limitation runs from the date of knowledge. Section 17 of the Limitation Act applies, and the Special Court properly punished the appellant as application was filed within limitation after discovery of fraud.

Parties
Appellant: Pallav Sheth; Respondent: Custodian
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 August 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment (appeal From Special Court)
Outcome
appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Limitation Period for Contempt Proceedings, Fraud Exception to Limitation, Power to Punish for Contempt, Interpretation of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Special Court Powers Under Article 215
Constitutional Law Contempt of Court Civil Procedure Statutory Interpretation Limitation Period for Contempt Proceedings Fraud Exception to Limitation Power to Punish for Contempt Interpretation of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pallav Sheth

Appellant

Custodian

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment (appeal From Special Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether limitation under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 bars contempt proceedings when fraud is involved
  2. 2 When does the period of limitation commence for contempt proceedings—date of commission or date of knowledge
  3. 3 Whether Special Court possesses power under Article 215 to punish for contempt

Ratio Decidendi

Action for contempt must be initiated by filing an application or the court issuing suo motu notice within one year from date of contempt, but in cases of fraud, limitation runs from the date of knowledge. Section 17 of the Limitation Act applies, and the Special Court properly punished the appellant as application was filed within limitation after discovery of fraud.

Court Disposition

appeals dismissed

Orders

  • impugned judgment of Special Court affirmed
  • appellant to surrender and serve sentence awarded by Special Court within a week