1 S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No.171 of 2008 IN S.B. Civil First Appeal No.39 of 1993 Kishan Lal Vs .Rameshwar Lal &Others IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR J U D G M E N T S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No.171 of 2008 IN S.B. Civil First Appeal No.39 of 1993 Kishan Lal son of Shri Hasa Ram Sindhi VERSUS Rameshwar Lal son of Shri Murlidhar and Others Date of Judgment :::: 11th January, 2010. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dalip Singh Mr. Amit Gupta, on behalf of Mr. B.L.Agarwal, Counsel for the Petitioner-appellant Mr. Vishwajeet Mantri, Counsel for the contemnor-respondents *** By the Court : Heard learned counsel for the parties. This contempt petition, under Section 12 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, has been filed by the petitioner- appellant, as the respondents failed to comply with the undertaking given before this Court on 08.11.2005, while deciding the Civil First Appeal bearing No.39 of 1993. The petitioner-appellant, in the appeal, was the respondent and he was granted time up-to 30.06.2007 to hand- 2 S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No.171 of 2008 IN S.B. Civil First Appeal No.39 of 1993 Kishan Lal Vs .Rameshwar Lal &Others over the vacant possession of the premises, in dispute and submit an undertaking to that effect. It was contended by the petitioner-decree-holder that the respondents failed to hand-over the possession and violated the solemn undertaking given to this Court as such this contempt petition came to be filed before this Court. On 04.12.2009 as none appeared on behalf of the respondents, despite service, they were directed to be summoned by bailable the warrants in the sum of Rs.10,000/- each to remain present before this Court on 11.01.2010. Today, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 namely; Ashok Kumar son of Shri Rameshwar Lal and Smt. Ramdulari wife of Shri Rameshwar Lal are present and have been identified by their respective counsel. They have submitted an application before this Court praying for recalling the order dated 04.12.2009 for issuing the bailable warrant. They also submitted that the respondent no.1 has died during the pendency of the proceedings on 25.05.2009 and as such the proceedings against the respondent No.1 may be dropped. The Registry is directed to register the application for recalling of the order issuing bailable warrants. In the facts and circumstances, as has been mentioned in the application, since the intention of the Court was to secure the presence of the respondents before this 3 S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No.171 of 2008 IN S.B. Civil First Appeal No.39 of 1993 Kishan Lal Vs .Rameshwar Lal &Others Court and they have presented themselves today, I deem it an appropriate to recall the order dated 04.12.2009 and allow the application. Matter was heard on the merits also. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents have, in the meanwhile, handed over the possession of the premises, in dispute to the petitioner-decree- holder. However, it is submitted by the learned counsel that the rent @ Rs.500/- per month for a period of 20-months till the date of handing over the possession was due. This amount is Rs.10,000/- (20x500) and the same is not disputed by the respondents. The respondents have also submitted an unconditional apology in writing before this Court today. Taking the totality of the circumstances into consideration, as have been mentioned above, I am inclined to accept this unconditional apology submitted by the respondent Nos.2 and 3. Notices issued to the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are accordingly discharged. Since, the respondent No.1 has died on 25.05.2009, the proceedings against the respondent No.1 are dropped. The respondents have not disputed their liability to pay the amount of Rs.10,000/- towards the arrears of the rent 4 S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No.171 of 2008 IN S.B. Civil First Appeal No.39 of 1993 Kishan Lal Vs .Rameshwar Lal &Others and have prayed that the amount may be permitted to be paid to the decree holder in 10 monthly installment of Rs.1000/- each and have submitted their affidavits also. Learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection to the same and has left the matter to the Court. In view of the above, I am inclined to accept the prayer made by the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and also take on record the undertaking submitted by the respondent Nos.2 and 3, along with the unconditional apology to the effect that they would pay the arrears of rent amounting to Rs.10,000/- in 10 monthly installments of Rs.1000/- each. The first installment of Rs.one thousand shall be paid on or before 28th February, 2010 and subsequent installment by the last day of every month thereafter. In case, the respondents are unable to make the payment to the decree holder, they may deposit the same by an application before the learned trial Court (Executing Court), which would issue notice to the decree holder and pay the same to the decree-holder and direct the decree holder to furnish the bank account number so that subsequent deposit may be made in the bank account. In the light of the above, this contempt petition is disposed of. Notices stands discharged. The affidavit and undertaking be kept on record. 5 S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No.171 of 2008 IN S.B. Civil First Appeal No.39 of 1993 Kishan Lal Vs .Rameshwar Lal &Others The application submitted today for recalling the order dated 04.12.2009 stands allowed and disposed of. (Dalip Singh), J. Ashok/