Directions Issued With Notices In Contempt Proceedings Can Be Challenged In Intra Court Appeal Or SLP And Not In Contempt Appeal: Allahabad HC
The Allahabad High Court ruled that if the Court decided an issue or made a direction while issuing notices in contempt proceedings, the person aggrieved can challenge the directions in intra court appeal and not in contempt appeal.
The Court was hearing a contempt appeal against an order of the lower Court who in addition to the issuance of notice also gave directions that the district administration shall not stop construction of those persons.
The bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Mohd. Azhar Husain Idris observed, “Clause v of the judgment makes it abundantly clear that where the High Court in the exercise of contempt proceedings decides an issue or makes a direction relating to the merits of the dispute the aggrieved person is not without remedy. Such an order is open to challenge in intra-court appeal if the order under challenge is passed by the learned Single Judge and in the absence of intra- court appeal by seeking special leave to appeal, under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.”
In the present appeal, a preliminary objection was raised to the maintainability of the contempt appeal on the ground that against the issuance of notice in contempt no appeal would be maintainable.
It was submitted by the Counsel for the Respondent that in the event appellant is aggrieved by the directions issued while issuing notices the remedy available to the appellant would be to file a special appeal.
The Court relied on the decision in Midnapore Peoples Co-op. Bank Ltd. & Ors. vs. Chunilal Nanda & Ors. 2006 (5) SCC 399 wherein an order came to be passed by the High Court in contempt proceedings. The Court quoted, “If the High Court, for whatsoever reason, decides an issue or makes any direction, relating to the merits of the dispute between the parties, in a contempt proceedings, the aggrieved person is not without remedy. Such an order is open to challenge in an intra-court appeal (if the order was of a learned Single Judge and there is a provision for an intra-court appeal), or by seeking special leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India (in other cases).”
The Court stated that this contempt appeal would not be maintainable, particularly as the contempt court had only issued notices in the matter so far against which admittedly an appeal would not lie.
As per the Court, for the directions that were issued while issuing notices, the remedy would lie elsewhere in terms of the observations made by the Supreme Court in the Midnapore case.
The Court dismissed the appeal as non-maintainable.
Cause Title: International Service Fellowship Usa v. Harendra Kumar Masih (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC:61731-DB)
Appearance:
Appellant: Adv. Indra Mani Tripathi
Respondent: Adv. Rishabh Agarwal
