Jagdish Kaur Parmar v. Puneet Goel,South Delhi Municipal Corporation And ANR

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 230/2017 & CM APPL. 10909/2017 JAGDISH KAUR PARMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Kanika Sharma, Advocate with Mr. Pravin Sharma and Mr. Prannav Sharma, Advocates.

versus PUNEET GOEL,SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ajay Digpaul, Advocate for SDMC.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

O R D E R

% 20.03.2017 Present contempt petition has been filed alleging that the respondentSDMC had made a false statement before a Coordinate Bench in W.P.(C) 822/2016.

It is further averred that respondent No.2 has once again commenced illegal construction.

In the opinion of this Court, if according to the petitioner a false statement had been made, then the remedy lies in filing a perjury application and not a contempt petition.

Further, if fresh unauthorised construction has been carried out by respondent No.2, it constitutes a fresh cause of action.

Consequently, present contempt petition and application are disposed of with liberty to the petitioner, if she so desires, to file appropriate legal proceedings. Rights and contentions of all parties are left open. MANMOHAN, J MARCH 20, 2017 js