https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298722 A contempt petition was held not barred by limitation because the alleged non-compliance was treated as a continuing failure in the maintenance of revenue records, and the court held that its constitutional contempt power could not be defeated on the technical objection raised. The court further found wilful disobedience of an earlier judgment requiring actual cultivatory possession to be recorded under the Delhi Land Revenue framework, and held that reliance on the struck-down exclusionary amendment was misplaced. The respondents were found guilty of contempt for deliberate and contumacious non-recording of possession, with sentencing deferred. en-us Tue, 09 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Nov 2021 16:44:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298722 A contempt petition was held not barred by limitation because the alleged non-compliance was treated as a continuing failure in the maintenance of revenue records, and the court held that its constitutional contempt power could not be defeated on the technical objection raised. The court further found wilful disobedience of an earlier judgment requiring actual cultivatory possession to be recorded under the Delhi Land Revenue framework, and held that reliance on the struck-down exclusionary amendment was misplaced. The respondents were found guilty of contempt for deliberate and contumacious non-recording of possession, with sentencing deferred. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 09 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298722