Anuradha Gupta VsK. Srinivas Rao

The applicant in the above application and the Contempt Case is the plaintiff in O.S.No.59 of 2007 on the file of XI Additional Chief Judge, City

Civil Court, Hyderabad.

She had filed the said suit for specific performance, mandatory and prohibitory injunctions, damages and costs against the defendants / respondents

in the above Interlocutory Application.

She succeeded in the suit and a decree for specific performance with costs was passed on 12.09.2016 in her favour against the respondents.

CCCA.No.240 of 2016 was filed by the 4th defendant in the suit / 1st respondent in the above I.A. challenging the Judgment and Decree

dt.12.09.2016 passed in O.S.No.59 of 2007 on the file of XI Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

In CCCA.MP.No.665 of 2016 filed by the 1st respondent in the I.A. / appellant in the appeal / 4th defendant, interim suspension of the judgment

and decree in O.S.No.59 of 2007 was granted on 21.11.2016 by this Court restricting it to Flat No.301, in the building known as ‘The

Residency’, premises No.8-2-580, Road No.7, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad â€" 500 034, which is part of the plaint schedule in the suit.

CCCA.MP.No.746 of 2016 was filed by the applicant / plaintiff to vacate the said order.

On 07.02.2017, a Division Bench of this Court made the said order absolute subject to the 1st respondent in the I.A. / 4th defendant in the suit

depositing to the credit of the suit Rs.20,000/- per month from March, 2017 as a condition precedent for him to remain in possession. The Division

Bench directed him to deposit such amounts on or before 5th of every succeeding month. The applicant / plaintiff was permitted to withdraw the

amount deposited without furnishing any security. The 1st respondent was directed not to alienate, change or create any third party interest over the

said Flat No.301, pending the CCCA.

Thereafter, the applicant filed I.A.No.1 of 2018 to vacate the order dt.07.02.2017 in CCCA.MP.No.665 of 2016 on the ground that the said order

was not complied with by the 1st respondent.

On 23.10.2018, a Division Bench of this Court disposed of the said I.A. stating that lumpsum payments were made by the 1st respondent pursuant

to the above order dt.07.02.2017 in CCCA.MP.No.665 of 2016; these have to be construed as delayed payments and not as non-payment; as on

23.10.2018, there were no arrears except for the months of September and October, 2018; and the delay in deposit was caused on account of certain

technical difficulties faced by the 1st respondent. So, the Court directed the applicant to inform in writing the learned counsel for the 1st respondent,

the details of the Saving Bank Account number, Branch and the name of the Bank into which the monies were to be deposited; and upon the

information being so furnished by the learned counsel for the applicant, the 1st respondent was directed to make periodical deposits directly into the

said account by way of online transfers.

Complaining that this order dt.23.10.2018 in I.A.No.1 of 2018 in CCCA.MP.No.665 of 2016 in CCCA.No.240 of 2016 was violated, the applicant

filed I.A.No.1 of 2019 to vacate the interim order dt.07.02.2017 in CCCA.MP.No.665 of 2016 in CCCA.No.240 of 2016; and also, CC.No.618 of

2019 to punish the 1st respondent for willful disobedience of the said order.

In I.A.No.1 of 2019 and also in CC.No.618 of 2019, it is the contention of the applicant that the 1st respondent failed to make any payment from

November, 2018; as on 23.04.2019, when this application / C.C. was filed and the 1st respondent was due a further sum of Rs.1,20,000/- over and

above Rs.2 lakhs which were due until October, 2018. It is stated that the applicant had even got issued a legal notice dt.02.04.2019 to the counsel for

1st respondent calling upon the 1st respondent to deposit the dues; and despite service of the said notice, no deposits had been made by the 1st

respondent. It was alleged that as on 23.04.2019, a sum of Rs.3,20,000/- is due and that the 1st respondent was repeatedly, willfully and wantonly

violating the orders passed by this Court despite there being specific directions to deposit the amounts every month. It was therefore prayed that the

interim suspension granted on 21.11.2016 in CCCA.MP.No.665 of 2016 should be vacated and the 1st respondent should also be punished for willful

disobedience of the order dt.23.10.2018 in I.A.No.1 of 2018 in CCCA.MP.NO.665 of 2016.

Though the Contempt Case was filed in 2019 and notice was served by R.P.A.D. on the 1st respondent on 17.09.2019, he did not enter

appearance through counsel immediately. The process server reported that he had vacated the address given in the suit six years back.

Then this Bench directed on 16.06.2021 the Contempt Case to be listed along with CCCA.No.240 of 2016 filed by the 1st respondent in this Court.

Only then, on 28.06.2021, Sri Tarun G. Reddy, Advocate, who was also counsel for the 1st respondent in the CCCA.No.240 of 2016, took notice

in the Contempt Case on behalf of 1st respondent and entered appearance and filed Vakalat on behalf of 1st respondent on 06.07.2021. We may point

out that the said counsel had received the legal notice dt.02.04.2019 sent by the counsel for the applicant regarding defaults committed by 1st

respondent on the same day itself.

In the meantime, the applicant in the I.A. / plaintiff in the suit died on 24.10.2020 and her legal representatives were brought on record in the

CCCA.No.240 of 2016 vide order dt.15.07.2021 in I.A.Nos.2, 4 and 5 of 2021. In C.C.No.618 of 2019 also the legal representatives were impleaded

on 16.06.2021 in IA.Nos.1 to 3 of 2021 on 15.7.2021.

Having regard to the said circumstance, in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in CCCA.No.240 of 2016 also, the legal heirs of the applicant are suo moto impleaded

in exercise of the powers conferred on this Court under Section 151 C.P.C.

Initially, on 07.07.2021, the 1st respondent filed a counter-affidavit in the C.C.No.618 of 2019 giving in para no.5 thereof a table of payments said

to have been made by him.

A perusal of the same indicates that in spite of the specific order dt.23.10.2018 in I.A.No.1 of 2018 in CCCA.MP.No.665 of 2016 in

CCCA.No.240 of 2016 to directly make online transfer every month into the Savings Bank Account of the applicant of Rs.20,000/-, the 1st respondent

had deposited :

(i) vide Cheque bearing No.104323 dt.23.09.2019, Rs.1,20,000/- representing the deposit from December, 2018 to May, 2019,

(ii) vide online NEFT transaction Ref.No.150142422 dt.02.07.2021, Rs.80,000/- representing the deposit from June, 2019 to September, 2019;

(iii) vide online NEFT transaction Ref.No.150143784 dt.02.07.2021, Rs.2,40,000/- representing the deposit from October, 2019 to September, 2020;

(iv) vide online NEFT transaction Ref.No.150144722 dt.02.07.2021, Rs.1,20,000/- representing the deposit from October, 2020 to March, 2021;

(v) vide online NEFT transaction Ref.No.153588436 dt.06.07.2021, Rs.60,000/- representing the deposit from April, 2021 to June, 2021.

Thus, all these payments were made belatedly in spite of the order dt.23.10.2018 in I.A.No.1 of 2018 in CCCA.MP.No.665 of 2016 in

CCCA.No.240 of 2016, and in spite of the counsel for 1st respondent having received the legal notice dt.02.04.2019 from the counsel for the applicant

about the delay in making deposits regularly as per the said order. In fact, the payments (ii) to (v) as noted above were made only after the counsel for

1st respondent took notice in the Contempt Case on behalf of 1st respondent.

In the counter-affidavit filed by the 1st respondent, he admitted that some payments were delayed, but pleaded that such delay was on account of

various reasons including current COVID -19 pandemic wherein some of his family members were allegedly unwell and one aunt of his had passed

away. He pleaded that delay in making the payment was inadvertent and he had no intention to commit contempt of the orders passed by this Court.

He tendered unconditional apology and undertook to henceforth make payments on time.

We are not at all impressed with the stand of the 1st respondent.

The COVID-19 pandemic and consequent disruptions / lockdowns occurred in India in/after March, 2020 only, and it cannot be a ground for the

1st respondent to make delayed payments from December, 2018 till February, 2020.

Even otherwise, online transfers could have been made by him by taking recourse to internet banking or by giving to his banker standing

instructions to deposit every month Rs.20,000/- into the Savings Bank Account of the applicant from his Savings Bank account to ensure compliance

with the order dt.23.10.2018 in I.A.No.1 of 2018 in CCCA.MP.No.665 of 2016 in CCCA.No.240 of 2016.

In our considered opinion, there is brazen violation of the said order by the 1st respondent in spite of the 1st respondent being made aware even in

April, 2019 by service of legal notice on his counsel Sri Tarun G. Reddy on 02.04.2019 about the repeated non-compliance of the said order.

We do not find any bona fides in the conduct of the 1st respondent in view of his continuous and repeated violations of the said order, and we are

of the opinion that his apology is an empty formality without any sincerity, and we decline to accept it.

On account of the recurrent, continuous breach of the order passed by this Court on 23.10.2018 in I.A.No.1 of 2018 in CCCA.MP.No.665 of 2016

in CCCA.No.240 of 2016, we hold that the 1st respondent has willfully violated the said order and has committed contempt of the same warranting

punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

We are also of the opinion that the conduct of the 1st respondent not being bona fide, and one not inspiring confidence, it is just and necessary to

vacate the interim suspension granted on 21.01.2016 in CCCA.MP.No.665 of 2016 which was made absolute on 07.02.2017 in CCCA.MP.No.746 of

2016.

Consequently, we direct the 1st respondent to deliver peaceful vacant possession of the Flat No.301, in the building known as ‘The

Residency’, premises No.8-2-580, Road No.7, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad â€" 500 034 on or before 07.08.2021 to the legal heirs of the applicant

who are impleaded in C.C.No.618 of 2019 as applicant nos.2 to 4 and also as respondent nos.5 to 7 in the CCCA No.240 of 2016.

The 1st respondent shall also pay costs of Rs.50,000/- to the applicant nos.2 to 4 in the CC.no.618 of 2019 / respondent nos.5 to 7 in the CCCA

No.240 of 2016 and shall also pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-within four (04) weeks. In default of payment of fine in the aforesaid period, he shall suffer

simple imprisonment for six (06) weeks.

I.A.No.1 of 2019 in CCCA.No.240 of 2016 and CC.No.618 of 2019 are allowed accordingly.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any in the Contempt Case shall stand closed.