Jagjit Singh & Ors. vs Upkar Kour and Ors.

Sunil Hali, J.—Dispute arose between the parties who claim their share in the ancestral property. Suit for partition accordingly was filed

before the District Judge, Srinagar. During the pendency of the suit parties are stated to have entered into compromise. The decree in terms of the

compromise was passed on 18.1.1963. It seems that after the decree was passed, the shares were assigned to the parties contesting the suit. It

seems that some dispute had arisen, as a result of which one Dr.Harbhajan Singh was appointed as Arbitrator to settle the dispute between the

parties. He entered into reference and after hearing the parties passed an award and consequently applied to the High Court for making the award

rule of the Court. The said application was transferred to the 4th Additional District Judge, Srinagar. It seems that the application was dismissed in

default on account of nonappearance of one Sardar Harbhajan Singh.

This application was contested by the other side on the ground that the proceedings are required to be conducted not under the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act but under the old Act. The application came to be disposed of by this Court on 12th September, 2005 with the direction that the

matter be taken up by the 4th Additional District Judge, Srinagar before whom the civil suit was pending. The circumstance of the case which

resulted in passing of this order by the court was the application filed by the Arbitrator Late Harbhajan Singh which was in essence report

submitted by the Commissioner and not the award. It is further revealed from the order that the compromise effected by the parties in 1963

resulted in passing of preliminary decree, for which the matter was referred to the Commissioner to identify the shares of the parties. The

application filed by the Arbitrator before the High Court was under the misconception. He was required to submit his report to the court which had

passed the preliminary decree.

It seems that during the pendency of the arbitration proceedings entitled Dr.Harbajan Singh vs. Jagjit Singh, the High Court had directed the

Deputy Commissioner, Baramulla vide its order dated 8.7.1988 to deposit the compensation of the property involved in the arbitration application

in FDR for one year and withhold this amount in the Trust. This amount is stated to have been withdrawn by the respondents despite court

direction. The resultant effect was that the application for initiating contempt proceedings against the respondents was filed before the 4th

Additional District Judge, Srinagar. The trial court after hearing the parties directed the nonapplicants to make the payment within a period of three

months in three installments in the office of Deputy Commissioner, Baramulla. As a consequence the contempt proceedings were dropped. Under

these circumstances the present contempt petition has been filed.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

The facts are not in a dispute. The direction issued by this court directing the amount to be deposited with the Deputy Commissioner, Baramulla

was required to be kept in fixed deposit in FDR. The amount stands withdrawn by the respondents.

The petitioner states that this amount was to remain in Trust with the Deputy Commissioner and the respondents could not have withdrawn the

said amount from the office of the Deputy Commissioner. It consequently also bound the Deputy Commissioner not to release the said amount in

favour of the respondents.

Statement of facts has been filed by the respondents.

It is contended that the claim of the respondents has not been contested by the claimants, as such they were entitled to receive this amount. It is

further stated that there are no proceedings pending before any court as on today. Both the parties have as the matter of fact shown their ignorance

regarding the fate of the proceedings pending before the trial court. Be that as it may. The fact of the matter is that the respondents have withdrawn

this money from the office of the Deputy Commissioner despite the fact that there was a direction to the Deputy Commissioner not to release this

amount in favour of the respondents. I, therefore, direct the respondents to deposit the said amount in this Court within a period of three months

from today. In case they fail to do so by or before 31st March, 2010, they shall remain personally present in the Court on that date.

In the meanwhile a report be called from 4th Additional District Judge, Srinagar indicating the status of the case pending before him.