RITA MARKANDEY versus SURJIT SINGH ARORA

The respondent is not liable for contempt for breach of the order granting time, since he did not file the required undertaking. However, he is guilty of criminal contempt for filing false affidavits and delaying delivery of possession, thereby impeding the administration of justice.

Parties: Petitioner: Rita Markandey; Respondent: Surjit Singh Arora
Jurisdiction: India
Judgment Date: 27 September 1996
Procedural Posture: Contempt Petition (c) No. 286 of 1995 in Civil Appeal No. 3056 of 1989 / Final Disposition
Outcome: Respondent found guilty of criminal contempt of court; not liable for civil contempt for breach of undertaking.
Legal Topics: Criminal Contempt, Civil Contempt, False Affidavit, Eviction Proceedings

Contempt of Court Rent Control Eviction Criminal Contempt Civil Contempt False Affidavit Eviction Proceedings

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Rita Markandey

Petitioner

Surjit Singh Arora

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt Petition (c) No. 286 of 1995 in Civil Appeal No. 3056 of 1989 / Final Disposition

Legal Issues

1 Whether the respondent is liable for contempt of court for not handing over vacant possession as directed by Supreme Court order
2 Whether filing of false affidavits amounts to criminal contempt

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Respondent found guilty of criminal contempt of court; not liable for civil contempt for breach of undertaking.

Orders

Respondent is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 2000; in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month.
Fine, if realised, shall be paid to the petitioner as compensation.