TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1034
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vant for the present purpose may be briefly recounted. 3. The petitioner has approached the NCLT by filing an application being I.A. (IBC) No. 1284/KB/2024 (hereafter "interlocutory application") praying for certain reliefs as indicated therein while alleging inter alia that the liquidator i.e. the opposite party herein has interfered with the petitioner's possession in respect of certain plots of land. By the said application, the petitioner has also challenged an e-auction notice dated June 04, 2024 published by the liquidator thereby putting on sale the assets and properties of the corporate debtor i.e. Amrit Hatcheries Private Limited. 4. On the said application an interim order was passed by the NCLT on July 03, 2024 thereby, permitting the auction to be held on the scheduled date but restraining the finalization of the sale till the matter would be heard out. 5. The sale that was initially scheduled to be held on July 04, 2024, as indicated in the e-auction notice which has been impugned in the said interlocutory application, fell through for wants of bids. Thereafter, a fresh e-auction notice was published on February 03, 2025 for sale of certain properties. Bids we....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iding an application for contempt, the Court would have no power to modify the original order. 12. He has taken the Court through the order impugned to demonstrate that the order dated July 03, 2024 had been passed on the interlocutory applications that had been filed by the petitioner as well as other applicants who were similarly circumstanced alleging illegalities on the part of the liquidator. It is submitted that an interim order passed on such interlocutory application could not have been interfered with by the NCLT while dealing with an application alleging violation of the aforesaid interim order by the opposite party. SUBMISSIONS OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY: 13. Ms. Bhuteria, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the opposite party submits that the revisional application should not be entertained by this Court. 14. She takes this Court through the petitioner's pleadings in paragraphs 47 to 51 of the revisional application and submits that the petitioner has approached this Court alleging that as time was too short for the petitioner to approach the NCLAT, therefore, the petitioner had no other avenue but to approach this Court by way of the present application under ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... application, while hearing contempt applications. 21. It is submitted that the pleadings in paragraphs 47 to 51 of the revisional application would not prevent the Court from exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India if a case for exercise of such jurisdiction is made out. ANALYSIS & DECISION: 22. Heard the learned Senior Advocates appearing for the respective parties and considered the material on record. 23. The first question that is to be answered is as to whether this Court can entertain the present revisional application in the facts of the present case when an appellate remedy is available to the petitioner before NCLAT. It is now well settled that an alternative remedy is not a complete bar on exercise of plenary constitutional powers by this Court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India provided the grounds for exercise thereof are satisfied. 24. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Embassy Property Developments Private Limited (supra) is highly instructive in such context. In the said case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka was justified in entertaining a writ pet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be noted:- "11. The purpose of contempt jurisdiction is to uphold the majesty and dignity of the courts of law, since the respect and authority commanded by the courts of law are the greatest guarantee to an ordinary citizen and the democratic fabric of society will suffer if respect for the judiciary is undermined. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 has been introduced under the statute for the purpose of securing the feeling of confidence of the people in general for true and proper administration of justice in the country. The power to punish for contempt of court is a special power vested under the Constitution in the courts of record and also under the statute. The power is special and needs to be exercised with care and caution. It should be used sparingly by the courts on being satisfied regarding the true effect of contemptuous conduct. It is to be kept in mind that the court exercising the jurisdiction to punish for contempt does not function as an original or appellate court for determination of the disputes between the parties. The contempt jurisdiction should be confined to the question whether there has been any deliberate disobedience of the order of the court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ble post either in a government department or in any public sector undertaking. This order, in our opinion, is wholly without jurisdiction and could not have been made in proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act or under Article 215 of the Constitution." (Emphasis supplied) 33. Similarly in Sudhir Vasudeva, Chairman & Managing Director, Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Limited & Others vs. M. George Ravishekaran & Others (2014) 3 SCC 373 the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as follows:- "19. The power vested in the High Courts as well as this Court to punish for contempt is a special and rare power available both under the Constitution as well as the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. It is a drastic power which, if misdirected, could even curb the liberty of the individual charged with commission of contempt. The very nature of the power casts a sacred duty in the Courts to exercise the same with the greatest of care and caution. This is also necessary as, more often than not, adjudication of a contempt plea involves a process of self-determination of the sweep, meaning and effect of the order in respect of which disobedience is alleged. The Courts must not, therefo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... avenue of appeal against orders passed in exercise of the contempt jurisdiction by the Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has in the said judgment clarified that when the Court exercising contempt jurisdiction passes an order touching upon the merits of the matter then an intra-court appeal (if such appeal is provided for) would be maintainable. 37. In the case at hand, it cannot be contested that the order impugned is appealable, insofar as the same touches upon the merits of the interlocutory application. However, since the directions in paragraph 12 of the impugned order have been issued while the NCLT was dealing with a contempt matter, which is a special jurisdiction, such direction has indeed been made in excess of its contempt jurisdiction as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Jhareswar Prasad Paul (supra), N. Vasudeva Rao (supra), Sudhir Vasudeva (supra) and Brahma Deo Mishra (supra). 38. Since the direction contained in paragraph 12 of the order dated March 10, 2026 passed by the NCLT has been found to be without jurisdiction, for the reasons indicated hereinabove, the said portion of the order (i.e. direction contained in paragraph 12 thereof) is set a....