Abraham John v. Sukhdev Singh And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.123 Date of Decision: 27.08.2025 ABRAHAM JOHN ....Petitioner

Versus

SUKHDEV SINGH AND ANOTHER .....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI Present:- Petitioner-in-person.

Mr. Navjeet Singh, Advocate for respondent No.1.

Ms. Jagriti Kalia, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for respondent No.2.

***** ARCHANA PURI, J. (Oral) CM-16045-CII-2025 The present application has been filed at the behest of respondent No.1, for placing on record reply. In view of the averments made in the application, same is allowed and the requisite reply is taken on record. MAIN CASE The present petition under Section 1, 2 (A)(B), 10(A), of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, has been filed by the petitioner, thereby asserting about non-compliance of the order dated 12.10.1998, passed in Civil Suit bearing No.352 dated 22.11.1994, RBT No.381 of 15.06.1995 (Annexure P-1).

Patient hearing was given to the petitioner, who is present in person, to explain with regard to alleged contempt committed by the respondents. However, he is unable to state about the detail, with regard to contempt of the order, so mentioned. Rather, he has made reference to the judgment delivered by learned trial Court, in Civil Suit bearing No.352 of 1994, copy whereof is Annexure P-1. It is a judicial decision delivered by the Court, in the suit for possession and ejectment, which was filed by Jugal Kishore Malhotra against Sukhdev Singh. The said suit was decreed. Being aggrieved, Sukhdev Singh, had filed an appeal i.e. Civil Appeal No.88 of 05.11.1998, RBT No.48 dated 02.08.2003. The said appeal was accepted, vide judgment dated 15.12.

2003, passed by learned Appellate Court and the decree passed by learned trial Court was set aside and consequently, the suit filed by Jugal Kishore Malhotra, was dismissed. Copy of the judgment passed by learned Appellate Court is Annexure P-2. Also, it is submitted by the petitioner that RSA-937-2004 was filed, which is still pending. On query by this Court, as to what concern he has with the aforesaid litigation, the petitioner submits that the litigation is relating to his uncle and when he came to know about the same, he has filed the present petition. The petitioner is having no concern with the aforesaid litigation and therefore, at this stage, initiation of contempt proceedings, is not maintainable, at his instance.

Apart from the contempt petition, there is also an application i.e. CM-16960-CII-2025, filed by the petitioner, wherein there is mention made to give an order, as per the compromise, vis-a-vis the payment of mesne profits, at the rate of Rs.600/- per month, from 01.07.1994, till date.

The litigation is already pending between the parties and this Court, while dealing with the contempt roster, has no jurisdiction to pass any order, on the said application. As such, the said application is also not maintainable before this roster.

In view of the aforesaid observations, the petition in itself, is not maintainable. Hence, the present contempt petition is hereby dismissed. (ARCHANA PURI) 27.08.2025 JUDGE Himanshu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No