Contempt jurisdiction may continue despite an appeal, where no stay has been obtained against the operative order.

Pending availability or filing of an appeal does not suspend the operation of an order. Compliance remains required once the order is served or known unless it is stayed, varied, or modified by the appellate forum or the issuing court. Mere pendency of an appellate remedy, without stay, is not a defence to non-compliance, and disobedience in such circumstances may attract contempt jurisdiction. Contempt proceedings may therefore be entertained, and a rule may be issued, during the appeal period or after an appeal is filed if no stay has been obtained.

---

---

Issues: Whether contempt proceedings or issuance of rule can be entertained during the limitation period for filing an appeal, or after an appeal has been filed, when no stay has been obtained against the order sought to be implemented.

Analysis: The pending availability or filing of an appellate remedy does not by itself suspend the operation of the order. Compliance is required once the order is served or known, unless it is stayed, varied, or modified by the appellate forum or by the court that made it. Mere pendency of a challenge, without stay, cannot justify non-compliance, and disobedience in such circumstances may attract contempt jurisdiction.

Conclusion: Contempt proceedings may be entertained, and a rule may be issued, during the appeal period or even after an appeal is filed if no stay has been obtained.

---