2008 (4) TMI 828 - SC - Indian Laws

Contempt Petitions Dismissed: Insufficient Evidence for Alleged Violations on Rent, Construction, and School Management.

Sushila Raje Holkar Versus Anil Kak

The SC dismissed all contempt petitions, finding no clear case for contempt. The allegations included violation of a prior SC order, non-payment of rent ... - Issues Involved:1. Alleged violation of the Supreme Court's judgment and order dated 19.9.2005.2. Payment of rent arrears.3. Unauthorized construction on the disputed property.4. Interference with the management of the school.Summary:Issue 1: Alleged Violation of Supreme Court's Judgment and Order Dated 19.9.2005The contempt petitions were filed for the alleged violation of the Supreme Court's judgment and order dated 19.9.2005 in Civil Appeal No. 5807 of 2005. The Court had directed the maintenance of the status quo and restrained the appellant from making any further construction or altering existing structures until the disposal of the suit.Issue 2: Payment of Rent ArrearsThe petitioner alleged that the respondent had not paid the entire amount of rent for the premises leased out to him. The Supreme Court had directed the respondent to clear all rent arrears within one month. Despite this, the petitioner filed Contempt Petition No. 6 of 2006, claiming non-payment of rent. The Court noted that the respondent had deposited a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- and another cheque of Rs. 4,31,975/- in compliance with the Court's order.Issue 3: Unauthorized Construction on the Disputed PropertyThe petitioner alleged that the respondent continued to raise constructions despite the Court's order to maintain the status quo. However, the Court found no substantial evidence to support this claim. The photographs provided were insufficient to prove that the respondent had violated the Court's order. The Court emphasized that a proceeding for contempt should be initiated with utmost reservation and only when a clear case for contumacious conduct has been made out.Issue 4: Interference with the Management of the SchoolThe respondent filed Contempt Petition No. 79 of 2007, alleging that the petitioner interfered with the management of the school despite the Court's order. The Court found no merit in this petition, stating that the order of injunction related to the existence of the structure and not the recognition/affiliation of the institution.Conclusion:The Supreme Court dismissed all the contempt petitions, stating that no clear case for contempt had been made out. The parties were left to pursue their remedies available in law, with no order as to costs.