Prima facie contempt in refund non-compliance kept pending while respondents get time to file a reply.

The Delhi HC recorded a prima facie view that the respondents had not complied with earlier refund directions and may be in contempt of the order dated 28 March 2025, after noting repeated directions to process and grant the refund, the later rejection of the claim, and the petitioner's complaint of non-compliance. As the respondents sought time to file a reply, the Court granted four weeks for the response and two weeks thereafter for rejoinder, and directed the matter to be listed on the next date. The contempt proceedings were therefore kept pending for further consideration.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondents had prima facie failed to comply with the earlier refund directions and whether the contempt proceedings should be kept pending for response.

Analysis: The Court noted the repeated directions earlier issued for processing and granting the refund, the subsequent rejection of the refund claim, and the petitioner's grievance that the order dated 28 March 2025 had not been obeyed. On a plain reading of the earlier orders, the Court formed a prima facie view that the respondents were in contempt of the order dated 28 March 2025. Since the respondents sought time to file a response, the Court granted four weeks for filing of the reply and two weeks thereafter for rejoinder, and directed listing of the matter on the next date.

Outcome: The contempt matter was kept pending and posted for further consideration after granting time to the respondents to respond.

---