The Sonipat Central Co-op Bank Limited vs Shiv Co-op Transport Society Limited and Another

L.N. Mittal, J.—This is revision petition u/s 115 of the CPC seeking modification of order dated 30.9.2003 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sonepat. The petitioner in its petition in the trial court prayed for initiating contempt of court proceedings against the respondents for intentional violation and disobedience of orders dated 14.6.1997 passed by the court and for issuing seizure warrant of Bus No. HR-46-0016. Learned trial court vide impugned order dated 30.9.2003 has accepted prayer of the petitioner regarding seizure of the disputed bus and respondents have been directed to hand over the same in running condition to the petitioner within one month failing which amount of sapurdginama furnished by the respondents shall be recovered from them in accordance with law.

Grievance of the petitioner in the instant revision petition is that respondents should also have been punished for disobeying court order.

I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file.

Counsel for the petitioner contended that respondents disobeyed the undertaking given in the court. It was, therefore, contended that the respondents be punished for committing contempt of court. The contention cannot be accepted. u/s 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, no court shall initiate any proceedings of contempt either on its own or otherwise after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed. In view of the aforesaid, at this distinct stage of time, contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 cannot be initiated against the respondents and the same is barred by limitation. Consequently, prayer of the petitioner for punishing the respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 cannot be accepted. The revision petition is, therefore, dismissed.