Case: Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund Vs. Dharmesh S. Jain and Another

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 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 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.

Decision (1 = appeal accepted, 0 = rejected): 1

Explanation:
1[ds]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.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 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.