<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (4) TMI 553 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272567</link>
    <description>Willful violation of a consent decree or consent order, once it is made an order of the Court, can amount to civil contempt under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 even without any express undertaking to the Court. The two limbs of civil contempt-disobedience of a court order and breach of an undertaking-are distinct, and earlier decisions confined to undertakings do not control disobedience of consent orders themselves. The availability of execution proceedings does not exclude contempt jurisdiction, though the Court may exercise discretion on the facts. The contempt petition was held maintainable and the preliminary objection was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2025 15:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=519593" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (4) TMI 553 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272567</link>
      <description>Willful violation of a consent decree or consent order, once it is made an order of the Court, can amount to civil contempt under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 even without any express undertaking to the Court. The two limbs of civil contempt-disobedience of a court order and breach of an undertaking-are distinct, and earlier decisions confined to undertakings do not control disobedience of consent orders themselves. The availability of execution proceedings does not exclude contempt jurisdiction, though the Court may exercise discretion on the facts. The contempt petition was held maintainable and the preliminary objection was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272567</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>