URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE REAL ESTATE FUND versus DHARMESH S. JAIN AND ANOTHER

Citation: [2022] 3 S.C.R. 180 · Decided: 12-05-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
180
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 3 S.C.R.
   [2022] 3 S.C.R. 180
180
URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE REAL ESTATE FUND
v.
DHARMESH S. JAIN AND ANOTHER
(Contempt Petition(civil) No.940/2021)
In
Miscellaneous Application No.1668/2021
In
Special Leave Petition (civil) No.14724/2021
MAY 12, 2022
[M. R. SHAH AND B. V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.]
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Wilful disobedience of Court
orders – Respondents / contemnors, more particularly, respondent
no.1, were held guilty for wilful disobedience of the orders passed
by Supreme Court as well as the High Court and they were held
liable to be punished suitably under provisions of the Contempt of
Courts Act – Even thereafter sufficient opportunities were given to
respondents / contemnors to either comply with the orders of Supreme
Court and the High Court, or to settle the dispute amicably with the
petitioner – Respondents/contemnors neither complied with such
orders of the Supreme Court and the High Court nor was the dispute
settled – In the circumstances, Respondent no.1 now sentenced by
the Supreme Court to undergo seven days simple imprisonment –
Fine imposed on both respondents, to be deposited before the High
Court within two weeks – However, so as to give one last opportunity
to the contemnor to purge the contempt and comply with the orders
passed by the High Court as well as the Supreme Court, the sentence
imposed shall be kept in abeyance for two weeks, failing which,
such sentence shall take effect and on non-compliance, respondent
No.1 will then surrender before the concerned Court / Authority to
undergo the sentence of seven days simple imprisonment as imposed
by the Supreme Court – Sentence / Sentencing.
INHERENT JURISDICTION : Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 940
of 2021.
In
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
181
Miscellaneous Application No.1668 of 2021
In
Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.14724 of 2021
From the Judgment and Order dated 28.10.2021 of this Court and
dated 08.08.2019 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Notice
of Motion No.960 of 2019 in Commercial Arbitration Petition No.55 of
2019.
Puneet Singh Bindra, Ms. Simran Jeet, Sanampreet Singh, Advs.
for the Petitioner.
Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv., Kunal Vajani, Ashok Paranjpe, Kunal
Mimani, Shubhang Tandon, Advs. for the Respondents.
The Order of the Court was passed
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Vide detailed judgment and order dated 10.03.2022 passed in
the aforesaid Contempt Petition, this Court held the respondents guilty,
more particularly, respondent No.1 herein – Dharmesh S. Jain, for the
contempt of this Court for wilful disobedience of the order dated
28.10.2021 passed by this Court in Miscellaneous Application No. 1668
of 2021 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 14724/2021, as also, for
wilful disobedience of the order passed by the High Court dated
08.08.2019 in Notice of Motion No. 960 of 2019 in Commercial Arbitration
Petition No. 55 of 2019 and the respondents herein rendered themselves
liable for suitable punishment under the provisions of the Contempt of
Courts Act. By the aforesaid judgment and order dated 10.03.2022, the
respondents/contemnors were required to be heard on the quantum of
sentence. Accordingly, on 22.03.2022, the matter was placed before the
Bench for further hearing on the quantum of sentence.
2. We have heard Shri Vikas Singh, learned Senior Advocate
appearing on behalf of the contemnors on the quantum of sentence.
However, at his request, the order on the quantum of sentence was
deferred, so as to enable the respondents/contemnors to either enter
into an amicable settlement with the petitioner or to comply with the
orders passed by this Court and the High Court, of which they are held
guilty for wilful disobedience.
URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE REAL ESTATE FUND v.
DHARMESH S. JAIN AND ANOTHER [M. R. SHAH, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
182
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 3 S.C.R.
3. Thereafter, Shri Vikas Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the respondents/contemnors was called upon by the Court with regard
to the latest developments which might have a bearing on the imposing
of a suitable sentence. Shri Vikas Singh, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondents/contemnors stated at the Bar that though the
respondents/contemnors have tried to settle the dispute amicably with
the petitioner, but there is no final settlement arrived at between the
parties. The fact remains that even after the respondents are held guilty
for wilful disobedience of the orders passed by this Court as well as

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.