https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311353 Contempt requires clear, wilful breach of an unambiguous order; where the earlier direction was read as confined to rent for the admitted leased area, no contempt could be fastened for the disputed larger portion or for alleged construction activity not proved on the material. The Court also reaffirmed that if an order is reasonably capable of two interpretations, contempt will not lie. On the respondent's complaint of interference with school management, the injunction did not establish any violation on the available record, so notice or punishment was not warranted. All contempt petitions were rejected, leaving the parties to pursue their remedies in accordance with law. en-us Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jan 2024 16:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311353 Contempt requires clear, wilful breach of an unambiguous order; where the earlier direction was read as confined to rent for the admitted leased area, no contempt could be fastened for the disputed larger portion or for alleged construction activity not proved on the material. The Court also reaffirmed that if an order is reasonably capable of two interpretations, contempt will not lie. On the respondent's complaint of interference with school management, the injunction did not establish any violation on the available record, so notice or punishment was not warranted. All contempt petitions were rejected, leaving the parties to pursue their remedies in accordance with law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311353