Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword or section
Like this
1Activity

Table Of Contents

0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Contempt in Violating Sc Orders 2008 AIR SC 3016

Contempt in Violating Sc Orders 2008 AIR SC 3016

Ratings: (0)|Views: 266 |Likes:
“Apology is an act of contrition. Unless apology is offered at the earliest opportunity and in good
grace, the apology is shorn of penitence and hence it is liable to be rejected. If the apology is offered at the time when the contemnor finds that the court is going to impose punishment it ceases to be an apology and becomes an act of a cringing coward”.
“Apology is an act of contrition. Unless apology is offered at the earliest opportunity and in good
grace, the apology is shorn of penitence and hence it is liable to be rejected. If the apology is offered at the time when the contemnor finds that the court is going to impose punishment it ceases to be an apology and becomes an act of a cringing coward”.

More info:

Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

08/14/2011

pdf

text

original

 
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIACIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) Nos. 12-13 of 2006INSPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(CIVIL) Nos.7659-7660 OF 2004
PATEL RAJNIKANTDHULABHAI & Anr. PetitionersVERSUSPATEL CHANDRAKANTDHULABHAI & Ors.Respondents/Contemners
J U D G M E N T
C.K. Thakker, J.
1.The present contempt petitions arefiled by the petitioners against respondentNos. 1 to 3, alleged contemners, praying thatthey be held guilty of ‘civil contemptforviolating orders passed by this Court on April26, 2004 and on January 10, 2005 and bepunished accordingly. A prayer is also madedirecting the contemners to deposit the amountreceived from third parties in consideration of
 
transfer of property effected by them duringthe period of interim orders of this Court.2.Shortly stated the facts of the caseare that petitioners and respondent Nos. 1, 4and 5 (in Special Leave Petitions) are realbrothers and heirs and legal representatives ofone Dhulabhai Patel. It was the case of thepetitioners that in 1961, one ChandulalMuljibhai Parikh and Dhulabhai Patel (father ofpetitioners and respondent Nos. 1, 4 and 5)purchased land bearing Revenue Survey Nos.459/2, 464, 465, 466/1 and 466/2 admeasuring 6acres and 9 gunthas of village Atladara, Talukaand District Baroda in the State of Gujaratfrom one Parvatibai Ingle by a registered saledeed. According to the petitioners, the amountof consideration was paid from the funds ofHindu Undivided Family (HUF) of Dhulbhai Patel,but name of respondent No. 1 ChandrakantDhulabhai Patel was shown as the purchaser ofthe property being the eldest son of decdeasedDhulabhai Patel along with Chandulal Muljibhai
2
 
Parikh. Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were minors atthat time. Respondent No. 1, ChandrakantDhulabhai Patel was also studying in a collegeand was having no source of income whatsoever.The entire amount was paid by deceasedDhulabhai. According to the petitioners,several documents revealed that the propertywas managed by HUF of Dhulabhai Patel. InOctober, 1986, Dhulabhai died. No partition bymetes and bounds had been effected between thesons of deceased Dhulabhai and the propertycontinued to remain as HUF property. Thepetitioners used to manage property after thedeath of Dhulabhai.3.In 1990, a Memorandum of Understanding(MoU) was entered into between respondent No.1, Chandrakant Patel, being eldest son ofDhulabhai Patel family on one hand and heirs ofdeceased Chandulal Parikh on the other handwhereunder it was agreed that a portion of landtowards western side would be treated as
3

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->