1979 (4) TMI 164 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether there was an express or implied undertaking given by the appellant to hand over possession to the receiver.
2. Whether the appeal before the Division Bench was competent and whether the order passed by the High Court was a nullity.

Summary:

Issue 1: Undertaking to Hand Over Possession
The appellant was convicted u/s 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, by the Delhi High Court for allegedly breaching an undertaking to hand over possession to a receiver. The Supreme Court examined whether there was an express or implied undertaking given by the appellant. The Court noted that the High Court's order did not contain an explicit direction for the appellant to hand over possession, only that he should not interfere with the receiver and should cooperate. The Supreme Court emphasized that an undertaking must be clear and express, either in writing or orally incorporated in the court's order. The Court found no such undertaking by the appellant and held that the High Court erred in construing the consent order as an implied undertaking. The Court concluded that the appellant's failure to comply with the consent order did not amount to contempt of court, as there was no express undertaking given.

Issue 2: Competence of the Appeal and Validity of the High Court's Order
The appellant argued that the appeal before the Division Bench was incompetent, rendering the High Court's order a nullity and disobedience of such an order would not attract the provisions of the Act. The respondent contended that the appellant, having filed the appeal and agreed to the consent order, could not later claim the order was void. The Supreme Court found merit in the respondent's argument but chose not to decide on this point, as the first issue was sufficient to resolve the appeal.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, and quashed the order directing the appellant's detention in civil prison for four months. The appellant was acquitted of the offence u/s 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.