TITLE: AMIT KUMAR DAS, JOINT SECRETARY, BAITANIK, A REGISTERED SOCIETY. V. SHRIMATI HUTHEESINGH TAGORE CHARITABLE TRUST.
CITATION: CIVIL APPEAL NO. …………… OF 2024 (@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 34892 OF 2014)
DECIDED ON: 30 JANUARY 2024
CORAM: JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE, JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
Facts of the Case
The controversy started when Baitanik, a registered society, was sued by the Shrimati Hutheesingh Tagore Charitable Trust (the Trust) under T. Suit No. 164 of 2004. The Trust sought damages, a declaration of ownership, and possession of the buildings at 4B, Elgin Road, Kolkata. On February 25, 2009, the Trial Court issued an order directing the Society to leave the property within 30 days. Feeling dissatisfied, the Society filed an appeal (F.A. No. 229 of 2009) and on March 3, 2010, they were able to obtain a stay order with conditions such monthly occupation charges and a deposit of Rs. 10, 00,000. The Trust then claimed that the Society had broken the stay order by renting out the space for exhibitions, which prompted the start of contempt charges. The Division Bench of the High Court in Calcutta decided to lift the stay order so that the decree could be carried out without resorting to contempt proceedings. The Joint Secretary of the Society, Contemnor Amit Kumar Das, filed an appeal with the Supreme Court in response to this ruling.
Issues Involved
Whether the High Court’s jurisdiction under Article 215 and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, permits the vacation of a stay order as a remedy for contempt. Did the Society willfully violate the stay order’s conditions?
Legal Provisions
Article 215 of the Constitution of India provides for the High Court’s contempt jurisdiction. Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, governs contempt proceedings.
Court’s Observation and Analysis
The Supreme Court examined the High Court’s authority in the case in light of both the 1971 Contempt of Courts Act and Article 215 of the Constitution. Citing Sudhir Vasudeva v. M. George Ravishekaran, the Court underlined the unique and exceptional character of contempt jurisdiction and issued a warning against deviating from the order’s clear instructions. In Mazdoor Sangh (BMS) v. Baranagore Jute Factory PLC, the Court upheld the authority to provide instructions for correcting acts of contempt, guaranteeing that a disobedient party does not get an advantage from their activities. But the Court determined that lifting the stay order went beyond its jurisdiction for contempt because it did not accomplish any restitutive or remedial purposes. The matter was remitted to the High Court for appropriate contempt proceedings, after the Supreme Court set aside the contested ruling. It encouraged the Trust to take the required actions before the High Court or the Execution Court and permitted it to seek legal remedies within the predetermined parameters. A portion of the appeal was granted, and each side was told to cover its own expenses.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Komal Goswami
