Supreme Court Advocates Contempt Proceedings Overturning Stay Order Violation

SUPREME COURT LAW INSIDER

LI Network

Published on: February 1, 2024 at 11:20 IST

The Supreme Court has emphasized that when a party deliberately violates a status quo order regarding possession, contempt proceedings should be initiated instead of merely vacating the stay of execution proceedings.

Justices Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay Kumar delivered this judgment in response to a case where a trust filed a suit against a registered society, seeking possession of the premises.

The High Court had issued a stay order during the appeal, directing the society to maintain the status quo. However, the society violated this order by letting out the premises, prompting contempt proceedings.

The Supreme Court, overturning the decision to vacate the stay, insisted on initiating contempt proceedings.

The case involved a trust filing a suit for the recovery of possession against a registered society. Despite the Trial Court’s favorable decree, the society initiated execution proceedings, prompting the trust to challenge the judgment in the Calcutta High Court.

While the Single Judge Bench issued a stay order on execution proceedings, directing the society to maintain the status quo, the society violated this order by letting out the premises to third parties.

The Division Bench, instead of initiating contempt proceedings, vacated the stay of execution proceedings.

The Supreme Court, citing the violation of the status quo order, ruled that contempt proceedings should be initiated and remanded the matter to the High Court.

This decision aligns with the Supreme Court’s observation that when a party disobeys court orders, the court should not only punish the contemnor but also ensure that the contemnor does not enjoy the benefits of disobedience.

The Court emphasized that vacating the stay order, in this case, was neither restitutive nor remedial. Citing the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the Supreme Court held that the violation of the status quo order constituted civil contempt and that the High Court had exceeded the scope of its contempt jurisdiction.

Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the order and directed the High Court to proceed with contempt proceedings.

Related Post