AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 283 wordsArindam Sinha, J
Mr. Bose, learned advocate appears on behalf of applicant and submits, there has been wilful and deliberate violation of directions made in order dated 12th April, 2021. Mr. Mishra, learned advocate appears on behalf of alleged contemner and submits, the contempt application is not maintainable. Order dated 12th April, 2021 was subsequently modified by order dated 24th July, 2021. There has been merger. It is order dated 24th June, 2021 that can be called for compliance. He submits further, compliance is not possible because applicant has not answered on requisitions in his client’s letters dated 25th May, 2021 and 29th May, 2021, disclosed in the show cause.
Mr. Bose relies on additional affidavit, copy served to alleged contemner. He submits with reference to page-10, savings bank account no.30406862960 was opened by the Branch on 17th November, 2017 in name of ‘Founder Trustee-cum-Chairman’. This is the account, regarding which directions were made in order dated 12th April, 2021. By order dated 24th June, 2021 there was correction of typographical error, to include this account.
Adjournment is granted to alleged contemner for compliance of directions made in order dated 12th April, 2021, corrected by order dated 24th June, 2021. It is made clear that the corrections are deemed to have been incorporated in order dated 12th April, 2021. Either alleged contemner is to comply or will demonstrate that said savings bank account no. 30406862960 was not the account, regarding which directions were made in order dated 12th April, 2021.
In event operation in said account is allowed in the meantime, compliance can be reported. Otherwise cognizance of contempt will be adjudicated.
5, List on 6th April, 2022.
…………………