AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Biswanath Rath, J
This is a contempt imitated suo-motu. Mr.Nagendra Kumar Sethi, Contemnor No.2 is present in Court. After providing opportunity to file response entering into argument by order dated 31.8.2021, in rejection of the plea of both Contemnors on the premises of benefit involved being decided through the Division Bench of this Court in Appeal, this Court directed for personal appearance of both Contemnors on the date fixed. Undertaking the exercise on 13.09.2021, this Court recording the exercise at the instance of Contemnor No.1 completed in the meantime postponed the matter to 14.09.2021 to hear the Contemnor No.2 as he was absent on 13.09.2021. In the proceeding on 14.09.2021, it could be noticed that the petitioner though entitled to 9% interest on the arrear although even he was paid the arrear but was paid only 9% on and above arrear, whereas he was entitled to interest @9% although. Recording the concession of Contemnor No.2 to provide him some time to pay the interest @9% although, the matter was next adjourned to 20.09.2021. On 20.09.2021, Contemnor No.2 again asked for adjournment, accordingly the matter was taken up today but with personal appearance of Contemnor No.2. It is made clear today the case was posted to hear only on sentence aspect.
In spite of opportunity, counsel for Contemnors informing the Court on payment of arrear on account of interim direction, went on arguing on the merit involving the dispute involved therein. Undisputedly, there is no full compliance of this Court's order even after disposal of Writ Appeal. Even after requesting for some time, Contemnor No.2 argues on merit involving directions by the Single Bench and almost confirmed by Division Bench. A serious attempt has been made by this contemnor in avoiding its liability on some plea or other, which cannot be a subject matter in the contempt application. Undisputedly, the order of Single Bench has been confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court but with little modification and there is also no challenge to the Division Bench order any further leaving no option to Contemnor No.2 than to work it out.
On perusal of records, this Court finds a cordinate Bench of this Court in disposal of W.P.(C) No.25638 of 2014 has passed the following order:
"In the backdrop of the aforesaid factual position and decision rendered in W.A.No.363 of 2011 dated 12.08.2014 (OSCARD Bank v. Sri Keshab Chandra Tripathy and others) and in W.A. Nos.364 of 2011 and 365 of 2011, the writ petition is dispsoed of with diredction to opposite party nos.1 and 3 to act in tandem to see that arrear dues of the petitioner are paid with accrued interest @9% per annum from the date of entitlement till its payment within a period of eight weeks from the date of communicaiton of the order and failure to comply the direction within the aforesaid period shall entail interest @9% from the date of entitlement till its actual payment.
With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petiton stands allowed:"
In challenge to order of learned Single Bench, OSCARD Bank Ltd. preferred W.A. No.326 of 2021 which got disposed of on contest vide order dadted 12.8.2021 as follows:
xxx xxx xxx.
It should be noted here that the Respondent No.1 is already 75 years old and has been waiting for his dues for a considerable period of time. He was constrained to file CONTC No.3774 of 2020 in this Court when despite the order of the leaned Single Jjdge, the Appellant did not comply with the directions issued therein. An order was passed in the said contempt petition on 16th October, 2020 by this Court for compliance. That order was also not complied with and this led to a suo-Motu Contempt No.1864 of 2021 in which notice was issued to the Appellant. It is only thereafter that the Appellant has woken up and challenged the impugned order.
For the aforesiad reasons, this Court is not persuaded to interfere with the impugned order of learned Single Judge. The writ appeal is accordingly dismsised.
It is expected that the Appellant and the Jajpur CARD will not further delay the compliance of the impugned order of the learned Single Judge."
For non-compliance of order dated 04.03.2020, passed in W.P.(C) No.25638 of 2014, this Court in disposal of contempt petiton on 16.10.2020 directed as follows:
"xxx xxx xxx.
Considering thesubmissions made and as this Court finds, no purpose will be served in issuing notice in such matter, the Contempt Petition stands dispsoed of with a direction to the O.P(s) to work out the direction of this Court issued in W.P.(C) No.25638 of 2014 on 4.03.2020, if not worked out in the meantime, within a period of fiteen days from the date of service of a copy of this order by the petitioner. Failure of compliance of this Court's direction, a suo motu contempt proceeding will be initiated agianst the O.P(s)."
In spite of repeated directions, the contemnors did not take any steps for complying with the orders. At this stage, learned cousnel for the petitioner filed an interlocutory applciation vide I.A. No.235 of 2020 for intiating suo motu contemnpt proceeding against the oppostie parties. This Court by order dated 10.03.2021 involving I.A. No.235 of 2020 has passed the following order:
"I.A. No.235 of 2020
10.03.2021 Heard learned ocunsel for the petitioner.
This is an applciaiton for initiation of suo motu contempt proceeding agianst the opposite parties.
For non-compliance of this Court's order dated 16.10.2020 passed in CONTC No.3773 of 2020 arising out of W.P.(C) No.25638 of 2014, the Registry of this Court is directed to initiate suo motu contempt proceeding agaisnt the opposite parties and issue notice accordingly. Requisites for which shall be filed by Monday (15.03.2021).
I.A. stnads dispsoed of."
Pursuant to which direction, the Registry of this Court registered the matter being Suo Motu CONTC No.1863 of 2021 agianst the Contemors. Pursuant to notice, both the Contemnors appeared and in an attempt to avoid compliance of this Court's direction, the dispsoal of Writ Petition and the Writ Appeal, filed their respective response. As discussed in paragraph-1, this Court observed, even after so much accommodation and commitment, the Contemnor No.2 appears to be in challenge to the dispute resolved through the Divison Bench in the dispsoed of Writ Appeal No.326 of 2021 and is in no mood in complying with the direction involved fully.
It is observed despite repeated opportunities involving so many adjournments, the Contemnor No.2 is in no mood to fully comply with the order of this Court and busy in shifting the responsibility in some way or other. Contemnor No.2 even failing to keep his own commitment already recorded in the order sheet involving the contempt proceeding.
Since Contemnor No.2 is in no mood in discharging his duty in the matter of payment in terms of the direction of this Court, at the same time keeping in view that there is no challenge to the order of Division Bench and Contemnor No.2 is still busy in challenging the direction of Single Bench in disposal of Writ Petition and Division Bench in the disposal of Writ Appeal, for this Court having got no scope to go to this extent in a contempt petition, while sentencing the Contemnor No.2 to undergo simple imprisonment for seven days finding there is no impediment in fully complying with the direction involved, permits the petitioner involving the writ petition to initiate execution proceeding for realization of interest under appropriate provision of law.
Keeping in view the request of Contemnor No.2 to provide him opportunity of Appeal, this Court grants ten days time to Contemnor No.2 for approaching the Higher Forum and obtaining interim protection, if any. Till then, he may not be arrested in the matter. Failure of obtaining interim order from the Higher Forum after expiry of ten days from today, the Contemnor No.2 shall surrender before the local police for serving the sentence passed in this proceeding.
..................................