1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR : O R D E R : S.B. Civil Revision Petition No.270/2009. (Gautam Chand Vs. Union of India & Another) November 25, 2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS ______________________________________ Mr. O.P. Mehta for the petitioner. BY THE COURT : In this revision petition, filed under Section 115, C.P.C., the petitioner is challenging order dated 29.11.2005 passed by the District Judge, Merta in Civil Appeal No.17/2005, by which, order dated 20.03.2001 passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Degana in Civil Misc. Case No.8/89 was affirmed. According to brief facts of the case, for disobedience of the interim order passed upon application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2, C.P.C., read with Section 151, C.P.C., a contempt petition was preferred by the Union of India against the petitioner and two other persons. In the contempt proceedings filed under Order 39 Rule 2A, read with Section 151, C.P.C., the learned trial Court held the petitioner guilty for disobedience of the orders passed by the Court and 2 passed order for one month's civil imprisonment. Against said order dated 20.03.2001 appeal was preferred to the District Judge, Merta but the learned District Judge vide impugned judgment dated 29.11.2005 affirmed the order passed by the trial Court, so also refused to accept the written apology filed by the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that still the petitioner is ready to file written apology if inadvertently he has committed disobedience of the orders passed by the Court. Further, the suit in which the order for temporary injunction was passed which is said to be disobeyed by the petitioner has been dismissed by the trial Court. Therefore, the learned appellate Court ought to have accepted the apology tendered by the petitioner but the learned appellate Court while ignoring the fact that suit itself has been dismissed, in which, temporary injunction order was passed refused even to accept the written apology filed by the petitioner. Therefore, no useful purpose will be served to send the appellant behind bars for undergoing the sentence of civil imprisonment. In the totality of the circumstances, while 3 upholding the finding with regard to disobedience, I am of the opinion that at this stage, it is proper to accept written apology and quash the order of sentence imposed against the petitioner provided the petitioner deposits Rs.21,000/- today itself. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that today he will deposit Rs.21,000/- and, so also, he has tendered written apology which is hereby accepted and taken on record. This revision petition is accordingly partly allowed to the extent indicated above. (Gopal Krishan Vyas) J. Ojha, a.