HSBC PI HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS) LIMITED versus PRADEEP SHANTIPERSHAD JAIN & ORS

Citation: [2022] 15 S.C.R. 430 · Decided: 11-07-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Directions issued
cites 6 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
430
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 15 S.C.R.
[2022] 15 S.C.R. 430
430
HSBC PI HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS) LIMITED
v.
PRADEEP SHANTIPERSHAD JAIN & ORS.
(Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 624 of 2020)
IN
(Civil Appeal No. 5158 of 2016)
JULY 11, 2022
[M. R. SHAH AND ANIRUDDHA BOSE, JJ.]
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Contempt of Court – When –
Held: Sufficient opportunities have been given to the respondents
to deposit the shortfall amount so as to maintain a sum of USD 60
million in their Corporation Bank account – Defence on their behalf
lacks bona fides – Respondents cannot be permitted to make the
same submissions which have not been accepted and/or rejected
earlier – Repetitive submissions which have not been accepted
earlier by court that itself is a wilful disobedience and tantamount
to contempt showing the conduct on the part of the contemnors –
Respondents are guilty of deliberate and wilful disobedience of
judgment and order dated 19.08.2020 passed in Civil Appeal No.
5158/2016 as well as order dated 06.05.2021 passed in the present
petition – They have rendered themselves liable for suitable
punishment under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act for
wilful disobedience – However, before any further order of
punishment/conviction is passed, an additional opportunity is given
to the respondents to comply with order dated 06.05.2021 as well
as judgment and order dated 19.08.2020 passed by this Court to
deposit the shortfall amount so as to maintain a balance of USD 60
million in their Corporation Bank account within a period of four
weeks from today – This would have a direct bearing on the
punishment to be imposed – Matter be put up for further order on
punishment.
R.N. Dey Vs. Bhagyabati Pramanik (2000) 4 SCC 400: [2000]
3 SCR 172 – distinguished.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
431
Welset Engineers & Anr. Vs. Vikas Auto Industries &
Ors. (2015) 10 SCC 609; SEBI Vs. Sahara India Real
Estate Corp. Ltd. & Ors. (2014) 5 SCC 429 – relied on.
KK Modi Vs. KN Modi and Ors. (1998) 3 SCC 573 :
[1998] 1 SCR 601; Firm Ashok Traders Vs Gurumukh
Das Saluja (2004) 3 SCC 155 : [2004] 1 SCR 404;
Delhi Development Authority Vs. Skipper Construction
CO. (P) Ltd. (1996) 4 SCC 622 : [1996] 2 Suppl. SCR
295; Rajinder Kumar Malhotra Vs. Paresh Biharilal
Vyas; 2016 SCC Online Bom 89; Rama Narang Vs.
Ramesh Narang and Anr. (2006) 11 SCC 114 : [2006]
3 SCR 1068; M/s Terra Manufacturing & Sales Vs. M/
s Alagendiraa Apparels 2011 SCC Online Del 4458;
Kunhayammed Vs. State of Kerala; (2000) 6 SCC 359 :
[2000] 1 Suppl. SCR 538; Maninderjit Singh Bitta Vs.
Union of India; (2012) 1 SCC 273 : 2011 (11 ) SCALE
634; Vedanta Ltd. (formerly 26 known as M/s. Sesa
Sterlite Ltd) Vs. Goa Foundation and Ors. 2021 SCC
Online SC 476; Food Corpn. of India Vs. Sukh Deo
Prasad (2009) 5 SCC 665; Court Liquidator Employees’
Assn. Vs. P.G. Mankad (2002) 10 SCC 477; Rama
Narang Vs. Ramesh Narang and Ors. (2021) SCC
Online SC 29; Ram Kishan Vs. Tarun Bajaj (2014) 16
SCC 204 : [2014] 1 SCR 538; Kanwar Singh Saini Vs.
High Court of Delhi (2012) 4 SCC 307 : [ 2011] 15
SCR 972; Kapildeo Prasad Sah Vs. State of Bihar (1999)
7 SCC 569 : [1999] 1 Suppl. SCR 725; Rita Markandey
Vs. Surjit Singh Arora (1996) 6 SCC 14 : [1996] 7
Suppl. SCR 56; Bank of Baroda Vs. Sadruddin Hasan
Daya; (2004) 1 SCC 360 : [2003] 6 Suppl. SCR 764 –
referred to.
Case Law Reference
[2000] 3 SCR 172
distinguished
Para 5.4
[1998] 1 SCR 601
referred to
Para 4.7
[2004] 1 SCR 404
referred to
Para 4.13
[1996] 2 Suppl. SCR 295
referred to
Para 4.14
HSBC PI HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS) LIMITED v. PRADEEP
SHANTIPERSHAD JAIN & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
432
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 15 S.C.R.
[2006] 3 SCR 1068
referred to
Para 4.15
[2000] 1 Suppl. SCR 538
referred to
Para 4.19
[2014] 1 SCR 538
referred to
Para 5.14
[2011] 15 SCR 972
referred to
Para 5.14
[1999] 1 Suppl. SCR 725
referred to
Para 5.14
[1996] 7 Suppl. SCR 56
referred to
Para 8.1
[2003] 6 Suppl. SCR 764
referred to
Para 8.1
CIVIL ORIGINAL CONTEMPT JURISDICTION: Contempt
Petition (Civil) No.624 of 2020 In Civil Appeal No.5158 of 2016.
Petition filed for willful disobedience of Court’s Order dated
19.08.2020 and 06.05.2021 passed by the Supreme Court of India in
Contempt Petition (Civil) No.624 of 2020 in Civil Appeal no. 5158 of
2016.
Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Nikhil M. Sakhardande, Sr. Advs., Rajendra
Barot, Ms. Liz Mathew, Ms. Vidhi Barot, Ms. Priyanka Shetty, Ms.
Apoorva Gupta, Dhruv Sharma, Ms. Sonali Jain, Ayush Chaddha, Dhaval
Arora, Ms. Vasudha Jain, Advs.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.