2017 (4) TMI 1536 - HC - Indian Laws

Contempt for non compliance of an order dated 11th March, 2016 - HELD THAT - In contempt proceedings, the Court is required to adjudicate and decide the question of whether there has been willful, deliberate and contumacious violation of an order of Court and upon such finding, impose a penalty. In contempt proceedings, orders may also be passed for the prevention of further contempt by issuance of directions, which ensure compliance of an order, violation of which is alleged. In proceedings for contempt, there is no scope for imposition of costs on the contemnor for delay in compliance of an order of Court. It is well settled that the scope of the original order cannot be expanded in contempt proceedings. As contempt is basically a matter between the court and the alleged contemnor and the role of the applicant for contempt is in the nature of that of an informant, it is not deemed necessary to call upon the petitioner in the contempt petition to make submissions - appeal allowed subject to costs of ₹ 50,000/- imposed on the first respondent in the contempt petition/appellant

Summary

Issues:
Contempt of court for non-compliance of court order.

Analysis:
The appeal was against an order passed by a Single Judge in a petition for contempt due to non-compliance of a previous order. The original order directed appropriate action based on a recommendation within three weeks. The appellant was directed to show cause for the delay in compliance. An affidavit of unconditional apology was filed by the appellant. The Court emphasized the importance of upholding its orders to maintain dignity and sanctity. Refraining from directing departmental action, the Court imposed a fine of &8377; 50,000 on the appellant, to be paid to the Tamil Nadu Legal Services Authority within four weeks.

Under the Contempt of Courts Act, a contemnor may face imprisonment or a fine for violating a court order. In contempt proceedings, the Court must determine if there was a willful violation of the order and may issue directions to prevent further contempt. Imposition of costs for delay in compliance is not within the scope of contempt proceedings. The original order's scope cannot be expanded in contempt proceedings.

Contempt proceedings are primarily between the court and the alleged contemnor, with the applicant playing the role of an informant. In this case, the Court allowed the appeal, but imposed a fine of &8377; 50,000 on the appellant. The contempt petition was directed to be posted for reporting compliance with the cost payment, after which the proceedings would be closed.