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
11 paragraphs · 228 wordsAjay Mohan Goel, J
Mr. Sumesh Raj, learned Additional Advocate General submits that compliance affidavit stands filed. The same be placed on record.
Mr. Rajnish Maniktala, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the judgment passed by this Court, non-compliance of which
led to filing of the present contempt petition now stands complied with, though belatedly, yet, on account of delayed implementation of the same,
certain rights of the petitioner stand infringed causing irreparable financial losses to him.
In the considered view of this Court, in case, the delay in implementation of the judgment has led to financial losses to the petitioner, as alleged,
then, it is always open to the petitioner to espouse said cause by way of appropriate legal proceedings but it may not be appropriate for this Court to go
into this issue in these proceedings because primarily what is to be seen by this Court in these proceedings is that whether there is willful disobedience
on the part of the respondents in the implementation of the judgment or not.
Accordingly, these contempt proceedings are ordered to be closed by discharging notice, but with liberty to the petitioner that in case he has any
surviving grievance, then, he shall be at liberty to approach the appropriate Court of law for the redressal of the same, in accordance with law.