Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund vs Dharmesh S. Jain Case

Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund vs Dharmesh S. Jain Supreme Court Case 2022

Landmark Cases of India / सुप्रीम कोर्ट के ऐतिहासिक फैसले


REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
INHERENT JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION(CIVIL) NO.940/2021
IN
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.1668/2021
IN
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(CIVIL) NO.14724/2021
Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund …Petitioner
Versus
Dharmesh S. Jain and Another …Respondents/
 Contemnors
O R D E R
M.R. SHAH, J.
1. Vide detailed judgment and order dated 10.03.2022 passed in the
aforesaid Contempt Petition, this Court held the respondents guilty, more
particularly, respondent No.1 herein – Dharmesh S. Jain, for the
contempt of this Court for wilful disobedience of the order dated
28.10.2021 passed by this Court in Miscellaneous Application No. 1668
of 2021 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 14724/2021, as also, for
wilful disobedience of the order passed by the High Court dated
08.08.2019 in Notice of Motion No. 960 of 2019 in Commercial
Arbitration Petition No. 55 of 2019 and the respondents herein rendered
1
themselves liable for suitable punishment under the provisions of the
Contempt of Courts Act. By the aforesaid judgment and order dated
10.03.2022, the respondents/contemnors were required to be heard on
the quantum of sentence. Accordingly, on 22.03.2022, the matter was
placed before the Bench for further hearing on the quantum of sentence.
2. We have heard Shri Vikas Singh, learned Senior Advocate
appearing on behalf of the contemnors on the quantum of sentence.
However, at his request, the order on the quantum of sentence was
deferred, so as to enable the respondents/contemnors to either enter
into an amicable settlement with the petitioner or to comply with the
orders passed by this Court and the High Court, of which they are held
guilty for wilful disobedience.
3. Thereafter, Shri Vikas Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the respondents/contemnors was called upon by the Court with regard
to the latest developments which might have a bearing on the imposing
of a suitable sentence. Shri Vikas Singh, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondents/contemnors stated at the Bar that though the
respondents/contemnors have tried to settle the dispute amicably with
the petitioner, but there is no final settlement arrived at between the
parties. The fact remains that even after the respondents are held guilty
for wilful disobedience of the orders passed by this Court as well as the
High Court vide judgment and order dated 10.03.2022, and even
2
thereafter giving sufficient opportunities to the respondents/contemnors
to either comply with the orders of this Court and the High Court, of
which wilful disobedience is proved and they are held liable to be
punished suitably under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, or
to settle the dispute amicably with the petitioner herein, neither the
respondents/contemnors have complied with the orders passed by this
Court as well as the High Court nor have they settled the dispute
amicably.
4. In the above circumstances and in furtherance of our earlier
judgment and order dated 10.03.2022 whereby the respondents, more
particularly, respondent no.1 has been held guilty for wilful disobedience
of the order passed by this Court dated 28.10.2021 in Miscellaneous
Application No. 1668 of 2021 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.
14724/2021, as also, the order passed by the High Court dated
08.08.2019 in Notice of Motion No. 960/2019 in Commercial Arbitration
Petition No. 55/2019 and rendered himself liable for suitable punishment
under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act and even thereafter
granting them sufficient opportunities to either settle the dispute
amicably or comply with the orders of this Court and the High Court,
neither the orders have been complied with nor the dispute has been
settled amicably, we hereby sentence respondent No.1 – Dharmesh S.
Jain to undergo seven days simple imprisonment, as also, impose a fine
3
on both the respondents, which is quantified as Rs. 5,00,000/- (rupees
five lakhs), to be deposited before the High Court of Judicature at
Bombay within a period of two weeks from today and on such deposit,
Rs. 4,00,000/- (rupees four lakhs) be paid to the petitioner herein and
Rs.1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh) be transferred to the Maharashtra State
Legal Services Authority. However, so as to give one last opportunity to
the contemnor to purge the contempt and comply with the orders passed
by the Bombay High Court as well as this Court, it is observed that the
aforesaid sentence shall be kept in abeyance for a period of two weeks
from today, failing which, the aforesaid sentence shall take effect and on
non-compliance, the respondent No.1 herein – Dharmesh S. Jain will
then surrender before the concerned Court/Authority to undergo the
sentence imposed by this Court, i.e., seven days simple imprisonment
for a wilful disobedience of the orders passed by this Court and the High
Court.
5. The present contempt petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid
terms.
………………………………J.
[M.R. SHAH]
NEW DELHI; ………………………………J.
MAY 12, 2022. [B.V. NAGARATHNA]
4

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

100 Questions on Indian Constitution for UPSC 2020 Pre Exam

संविधान की प्रमुख विशेषताओं का उल्लेख | Characteristics of the Constitution of India

भारतीय संविधान से संबंधित 100 महत्वपूर्ण प्रश्न उतर