Subhash Chandra Agrawal vs Naresh Chand Gupta & Anr

This Contempt Petition under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act has been filed, complaining the non-compliance of the order dated 11th January, 2011 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.2520/2010, by which the following directions were given:-

''11. Consequently, the petition of the petitioner is hereby dismissed. It is held that the Board of Revenue has rightly cancelled the sale certificate issued by the Tahsildar in favour of the petitioner in pursuance to the order passed by the Additional Collector. It is ordered that the Tahsildar shall complete the auction proceedings of the property and the interested parties are at liberty to submit their bids for auction and after accepting the auction bids, the Tahsildar shall repay the loan amount of the Bank and the amount which was deposited by the petitioner with the Tahsildar in pursuance to the order passed by the Additional Collector shall also be refunded to the petitioner.''

It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the auction proceeding was challenged, which was set aside by the Board of Revenue by order dated 23rd April, 2010. One Prem Chand Sachdeva, who was the auction purchaser and in whose favour the sale certificate was issued and he was placed in the possession, filed awrit petition before this Court, which was registered as Writ Petition No.2520/2010 and the said writ petition was allowed by order dated 11th January, 2011, with the directions mentioned above.

Being aggrieved by the order of the Single Judge, the said Prem Chand Sachdeva filed a writ appeal, which was registered as Writ Appeal No.62/2011.The said Writ Appeal was also dismissed by order dated 12/12/2012. Being aggrieved by the order of the writ Appellate Court, the said Prem Chand Sachdeva filed a Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).3934/2014, which too was dismissed by the Supreme Court by order dated 24/02/2014. Thereafter, the Tahsildar initiated the auction proceedings and the said auction proceedings were once again challenged by said Prem Chand Sachdeva by filing a Writ Petition No.8698/2016 and the said Writ Petition was dismissed by this Court by order dated 23/04/2018 with following observations:-

''Petitioner earlier had purchased in auction the property in question which is a house bearing No.20/1502/1 situated at Kali Mai Santar, Morar, Gwalior, which was mortgaged as a security towards Cash Credit Limit in M/s Shriram Cycle Centre, Morar, Gwalior, with respondent-Punjab National Bank, Morar, Gwalior. The auction was set at naught in Writ Petition No.2520/2010 decided on 11/01/2011, affirmed in W.A. No.62/2011 dismissed on 12/12/2012. As the matter on relegation was pending with the Tahsildar, the entire outstanding came to be settled which led the Bank to close the account.

Evidently, Tahsildar proceeded in furtherance to direction in W.P. No.2520/2010; wherein while upholding the order by Board of Revenue, of cancelling the auction, learned Single Judge directed the Tahsildar to complete the auction proceedings of the property and repay the loan amount of the Bank. And the amount which was deposited by the petitioner with the Tahsildar in pursuance to the order passed by the Additional Collector was directed to be refunded to the petitioner.

In view whereof, the petitioner has no locus to question the continuation of the proceedings by the Tahsildar.

Therefore, since no relief can be granted to the petitioner, consequently, petition fails and is dismissed. All interlocutory applications stand disposed of. Interim order stands vacated.''

It is submitted that thereafter, the Contemnor No.1 did not proceed further with the matter and on one pretext or other, he was keeping the proceedings pending and in spite of clear reply given by the Bank authorities, the Contemnor No.1 was avoiding the auction proceedings of the property and, therefore, this Contempt Petition has been filed.

Contemnor No.1 on 04/01/2019 gave an undertaking before this Court that he would take possession of the property in question by 5th January, 2019 and would complete the auction proceedings. It appears that thereafter, the said Prem Chand Sachdeva filed IA No.169/2019, an application seeking his impleadment in the present Contempt Petition. The said application was rejected by this Court by order dated 14/01/2019 after considering the previous history of the case as well as the findings given in Writ Petition No.8698/2016 by order dated 23/04/2018, by which it was held that the said Prem Chand Sachdeva has no locus standi.

IA 199/2019, an application for ad-interim stay as well as IA 200/2019, an application for intervention were filed by another intervenor, namely, Kuldip Chaturvedi and as none had appeared to press these applications, therefore, they have also been dismissed, as not pressed.

It is submitted by the counsel for the Contemnor No.1 that the auctions proceedings have been completed on 14th January 2019 and sale certificate has been issued in favour of Subhash Chand Agrawal and others and the final bid of Subhash Chandra Agrawal and Others of Rs.99,57,000/- has been accepted. It is further submitted by the counsel for the Contemnor No.1 that as the Contemnor No.1 could not understand the real implication of the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.2520/2010, therefore, he could not proceed further with the matter on the earlier occasion. He had also sought opinion from the Additional Advocate General, but as the elections were going on and the Contemnor No.1 was busy in the elections, therefore, he could not proceed further, immediately after receiving the opinion from the Office of Additional Advocate General and thus, there is a bona fide mistake on the part of the Contemnor No.1 in not taking immediate action in the matter.

Per contra, it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that in fact, the Contemnor No.1 has committed an offence punishable under Section 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. The property in question has been auctioned for an amount of Rs.99,57,000/-, whereas the earlier bid was of Rs.4,41,698/-. Although the said auction had taken place in the year 2007, but it is clear that even in the year 2007, the property was auctioned at a lower price and since the auction purchaser was placed in possession and he was enjoying the possession of the property in question and as the Contemnor No.1 by sitting over the auction proceedings, therefore, has given undue advantage to said Prem Chand Sachdeva. It is further submitted that even the Contemnor No.1 had any doubt, then the same was not only clarified by the Additional Advocate General, but after the order dated 23/04/2018 was passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.8698/2016, then everything was crystal clear and the defence taken by the Contemnor No.1 that he was not aware of the legal implication of the order dated 11th January, 2011 passed in Writ Petition No.2520/2010 and the order dated 23/04/2018 passed in Writ Petition No.8698/2016, cannot be accepted and it is merely an afterthought. Even the Bank had given reply in Hindi and, therefore, there was no iota of doubt about the interpretation of the orders passed by this Court.

So far as the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner are concerned, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner or any other person, if so advised, are free to lodge a report against Contemnor No.1 to the Special Police Establishment, (Lokayukt), for offence under Section 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act.

At this stage, this Court is not inclined to issue any such order in exercise of power under Article 215 of Constitution of India. However, as the present value of the property, even according to the auction proceedings, is Rs.99,57,000/- and the said Prem Chand Sachdeva was allowed to retain the possession of the said property without any right, title or authority of law, this Court is of the view that the Contemnor No.1 should remain more vigilant in future and he should not avoid to comply and implement the orders of this Court.

Accordingly, this Contempt Petition is disposed of with cost of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) payable by Contemnor No.1 in the account of Legal Aid Services Authority, Gwalior within a period of seven days from today, otherwise the Principal Registrar of this Court shall initiate proceedings for the recovery of the same.