COCP No.1308 of 2009(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.1308 of 2009(O&M) Date of decision: 23.7.2009 Om Parkash Dhall ......Petitioner(s) Versus Shri Parvesh Kumar and another ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Vijay Kumar Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.(Oral) CM No.16873-CII of 2009 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. COCP No.1308 of 2009 In this petition, the petitioner has alleged that while dismissing RSA No.1780 of 2009 vide judgment dated 28.4.2009 (Annexure P1-), this Court had granted the respondents two months' time for vacating the shop in dispute, however, the respondents have failed to vacate the aforesaid shops and thus, they have committed contempt of this Court by violating the aforesaid order. I have perused the judgment Annexure P-1. I find that the respondents have not given any undertaking to the Court and in fact, no directions were given by the Court to the respondents. Thus, no contempt is committed by the respondents. Faced with this, learned counsel for the petitioner cited Smt. Ram Pyari and others v. Jagdish Lal 1993(Suppl.) CCC 460, to contend that even if the respondent cannot be found guilty of violation of any COCP No.1308 of 2009(O&M) 2 undertaking, the Court should ensure the compliance of order by police force in the interest of justice as respondent derived specific advantage under the order. The judgment cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable to the facts of the present case. The question before this Court is “whether the respondents have committed contempt of Court or not?” There is no prayer of the petitioner to provide police help for compliance of the judgment and decree passed by this Court in RSA No.1780 of 2009. Even otherwise, the judgment passed by this Court has culminated into a decree in favour of the petitioner. The aforesaid decree passed in favour of the petitioner for possession of the suit property is executable and the same can be executed effectively. Thus, I find that the present petition has been filed by the petitioner to pressurize the respondent by abusing the process of law and the same is hereby dismissed with costs of Rs.5,00/-. July 23, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE