V S PRASAD Vs. H L JAYANARASEMHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS contempt petition is filed alleging that the first respondent had wilfully disobeyed the order passed by this court in m. f. a. No. 2883 of 1997, dated 26-8-1997 directing him not to sell or alienate or in any way encumber the schedule property.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that complainant filed a suit o. s. No. 1223 of 1997 on the file of the. City civil court, Bangalore for recovery of an amount of Rs. 8. 42 lakhs. In the suit he sought for attachment before the judgment of the schedule property, on the ground that the first respondent is trying to sell the schedule property. The first respondent made an averment that he is not intending to sell the schedule property. The trial court rejected the application filed for attachment. Against the said order the complainant filed an appeal m. f. a. No. 2883 of 1997 in this court. This court after satisfying that there is a prima facie case on merits passed an order dated 26-8-1997 directing the first respondent herein not to sell or alienate or in any way encumber the schedule property. Later, the first respondent filed a memo in the appeal stating therein that he has no capacity either to provide a surety or security at that stage, hence the appeal may be allowed and impugned order may be reversed and further to permit him to provide security at a later stage to raise the attachment before the trial court in the interest of justice. In view of the submission made by the first respondent in the memo, the appeal was allowed and the order of the trial court was set aside and this court passed an order that there shall be an order of attachment of the property as prayed for by the complainant. However, the trial court shall thereafter consider any application filed by the first respondent for raising the attachment, if he furnishes adequate security to the satisfaction of the trial court. The appeal was accordingly. allowed on 16-9-1997. Thereafter the first respondent alienated the property under registered sale deed dated 24-11-1997 for a sum of Rs. 24 lakhs in favour of the impleaded respondents.

(3.) THEREFORE, the present contempt petition is filed alleging that the first respondent intentionally and wilfully violated the order of this court and also violated the interim order dated 26-8-1997 passed by this court directing the first respondent herein not to sell or alienate or in any way encumber schedule property. Therefore, he may be punished in accordance with law by directing detention in civil prison and also directing attachment of his property and grant such other relief as per law.