TMI Blog2008 (4) TMI 828X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . A registered deed of lease was executed by her in favour of the respondent for 16,000 square feet out of the aforementioned 4.8 acres of land. 3. Disputes and differences arose between the parties. No registered deed of lease was executed for the remaining land admeasuring 1,21,721.6 square feet which is in possession of the respondent. Inter alia, for enforcing the said purported agreement of lease dated 11.8.1998, a suit for specific performance was filed by the respondent which is said to be pending in the Court of XXI, Additional District Judge, Indore. Applicant also filed a suit which was marked as civil Original Suit No. 45/01A for eviction and arrears of rent against the respondent in respect of said 1,21,721,6 square feet of land. Allegedly, the agreed rent in respect of the said land was Rs. 50,000/- per month. In addition to the said agreed rent, the respondent was required to pay a sum of Rs. 25,000/- for the land measuring 16,000 square feet in terms of the said registered deed of lease. A suit for injunction was also filed by the respondent against the petitioner for a decree for injunction restraining her from interfering with the possession of the land held by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in view of the fact that an educational institution is said to be functioning in the property. It was furthermore observed: 6. Learned Counsel for Res. No. 3 submitted that under the cover of this order, the appellant is attempting to put up constructions in the disputed property and it is just and necessary to prevent him from doing so. We think that this prayer deserves to be granted, especially, in the context of the fact that we are trying to maintain the status quo until the suit is finally disposed of. We, therefore, restrain the appellant - the plaintiff in the suit, from putting up any further construction and from altering or modifying any existing construction until the disposal of the suit. In other words, there will not only be an injunction against the defendants for demolishing the constructions in the entire plaint schedule property including the disputed portion, but there would also be an injunction restraining the appellant from making any further construction and from altering or modifying any existing construction in the plaint property including the disputed property. We also make it clear that the fact that we are permitting the structures in the dispu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9. Respondent filed a Contempt Petition which was marked as Contempt Petition No. 79 of 2007 alleging that the petitioner committed contempt of the court as she interfered with the management of the school despite the order dated 19.9.2005 passed by this Court. 10. Before we enter into the merit of the aforementioned contempt petitions, we may place on record two orders passed by this Court in these proceedings. This Court in order dated 13.12.2006 recorded as under: While deciding AIR2007SC1130 (Col. Anil Kak (Retd) v. Municipal Corporation, Indore and Ors.), a direction was issued to the appellant in paragraph 7 of the Judgment to clear all the rent in arrears (if any), either by tendering the same to respondent No. 3 or depositing the same in the trial court. This Contempt Petition has been filed on the ground that the said direction issued by this Court on 19.9.2005 has not been obeyed by the appellant namely Col. Anil Kak. Learned Counsel for the petitioner in the present Contempt Petition which has been filed by Sushila Raje Holkar (respondent No. 3 in the appeal) has submitted that as the direction regarding payment of rent has not been complied with by the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9.9.2005, it would be evident that the premises which was admittedly leased out in favour of the respondent, admeasured 16,000 square feet, wherefor rent at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- per month has been agreed to be paid by and between the parties and in this connection another suit bearing No. civil Original Suit No. 1/05A is still pending before the competent Court of law. It was submitted that this area of 16,000 square feet of land did not form the subject matter of the order dated 19.9.2005. It would appear that the rent in respect of 16,000 square feet of land being Rs. 25,000/- per month, the appellant in fact has paid more amount than he was required to pay. In this connection, our attention has been drawn to a statement showing the receipts of the amount of lease rent by the petitioner from the said 'Progressive Education' which upto 11.8.2006 amounting to Rs. 27,75,900/-. Our attention, furthermore, has been drawn to the following averments: It is very evident from a perusal of the Annexure A-1 that the Respondent/Contemnor is obligated and is liable to pay to the Applicant the sum of Rs. 50,000/- per month as rent to her. As stated in Annexure A-1 hereto, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udge, Indore being alleged arrears of Lease Rent from August, 2002 onwards. It was stated that a sum of Rs. 27,175/- was deducted in excess of the amount of TDS which has been also deposited. 13. This Court passed an order in equity. It, however, appears that it was specifically noticed that the subject matter of the admitted lease is 16,000 square feet, although a contention has been raised before us that in view of the agreement of lease the area of 1,27,721.6 was also subject matter of the lease. 14. A proceeding under the Contempt of Courts Act has a serious consequence. Whether the alleged contemnor has willfully committed breach of the order passed by a competent court of law or not having regard to the civil/evil consequences ensuing therefore require strict scrutiny. For the said purpose, it may be permissible to read the order of the court in its entirety. The effect and purport of the order should be taken into consideration. Whereas the court shall always zealously enforce its order but a mere technicality should not be a ground to punish the contemnor. A proceeding for contempt should be initiated with utmost reservation. It should be exercised with due ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It may be true that this Court upon hearing the parties, by the order dated 1.5.2007 granted the respondent 15 days' time to deposit all arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- per month including the rent for the month of April 2007. We are not concerned with the implementation of the said order as violation thereof is not the subject matter of the contempt proceedings pending before us. The order of this Court properly construed, therefore, would mean that the admitted lease would cover only 16,000 square feet of land. Different phraseologies like entire and admitted have been used by this Court. Construction of the said order, therefore, must be resorted to upon reading the same in its entirety. It is a well settled principle of law that if two interpretations are possible of the order which is ambiguous, a contempt proceeding would not be maintainable. In The State of Bihar v. Rani Sonabati Kumari [1961]1SCR728 , it was stated: The second contention urged was that even if on a proper construction of the order, read in the light of the relevant pleadings, the State Government was directed to abstain from publishing a notification under Section 3(1) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8SC1519 , this Court (wherein one of us; Panta, J. was a member), analyzing the provisions of Section 13 of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, this Court held: 11. The High Court has committed an error in applying the provisions of Sub-section (6) of Section 13 to the second suit initiated by the landlord under Section 12(1)(a) on the ground of arrears of rent. That provision is only for the purpose of striking out of the defence of a tenant if the rent is not deposited as required under Section 13 which has nothing to do with the provisions of Sub-section (3) of Section 12 or Sub-section (5) of Section 13. 12. In the present case, the trial court gave benefit to the tenant of Section 12(3) of the Act in the previous proceedings. The tenant by not depositing the rent either in the court or paying it to the landlord, has committed a default and there being three consecutive defaults in the payment of rent as referred in proviso to Sub-section (3) of Section 12 of the Act and on non-payment of arrears of rent within two months of the service of notice of demand, the landlord would be entitled to file a second suit for ejectment on the ground of arrears of rent and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
