IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No.223 of 2010 Roshan Lal ………..Petitioner Versus Neeraj Pandey …….Respondent Shri B.P. Nautiyal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Dated: 25th November, 2010 Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Heard Shri B.P. Nautiyal, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Present Contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner for punishing the respondent for committing contempt of this Court’s order dated 12.12.2001 passed in writ petition no.7019 of 2001 (M/S). 3. On 12.12.2001, this Court passed an order in writ petition no.7019 of 2001 (M/S) directing therein that petitioner shall not be evicted from the premises in question till further orders of the Court. 4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that inspite of the order passed by the Court in writ petition no.7019 of 2001 (M/S), the respondent has encroached upon a western part attached to the toilet, which is an open space of the tenanted premises and after encroaching upon the said open space of the tenanted premises, the respondent 2 constructed a wall in the said part of the tenanted premises with an ulterior motive to evict the petitioner and by doing so the respondent committed contempt of this Court’s order dated 12.12.2001. 5. This Court is not satisfied with the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, as truthfulness of this factual averment cannot be adjudicated in Contempt petition. Consequently, the Contempt petition is dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to move an appropriate application before the Court in writ petition no.7019 of 2001 (M/S). (V.K. Bist, J.) Arpan 25.11.2010