BANK OF INDIA versus VIJAY TRANSPORT AND ORS.

BANK OF INDIA versus VIJAY TRANSPORT AND ORS.

Respondents wilfully dealt with property in custodia legis and violated court orders, compounding their contumacious conduct; such actions polluted the stream of justice and warranted both simple imprisonment and fine as punishment for contempt of court.

Parties
Petitioner: Bank of India; Respondent: Vijay Transport; Respondent: Respondent No. 2 (sole surviving partner of Vijay Transport); Respondent: Respondent No. 3 (husband and power of attorney holder of Respondent No. 2)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 October 2000
Procedural Posture
Suo Motu Contempt Petition and Contempt Petition in Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment
Outcome
Respondents held guilty of contempt of court; sentenced to simple imprisonment for two months and fine of Rs. 2,000 each; default in payment of fine to result in additional one month simple imprisonment.
Legal Topics
Custodia Legis, Unauthorised Dealing With Property, Disobedience of Court Orders, Restitution, Court's Jurisdiction in Contempt
Contempt of Court Civil Procedure Custodia Legis Unauthorised Dealing With Property Disobedience of Court Orders Restitution Court's Jurisdiction in Contempt

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bank of India

Petitioner

Vijay Transport

Respondent

Respondent No. 2 (sole surviving partner of Vijay Transport)

Respondent

Respondent No. 3 (husband and power of attorney holder of Respondent No. 2)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Suo Motu Contempt Petition and Contempt Petition in Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents were guilty of contempt of court by dealing with property in custodia legis and by disobeying court orders
  2. 2 Whether punishment of simple imprisonment in addition to fine is warranted for the contemners

Ratio Decidendi

Respondents wilfully dealt with property in custodia legis and violated court orders, compounding their contumacious conduct; such actions polluted the stream of justice and warranted both simple imprisonment and fine as punishment for contempt of court.

Court Disposition

Respondents held guilty of contempt of court; sentenced to simple imprisonment for two months and fine of Rs. 2,000 each; default in payment of fine to result in additional one month simple imprisonment.

Orders

  • Both respondents to undergo simple imprisonment for two months and pay fine of Rs. 2,000 each within two weeks; default entails additional one month simple imprisonment.