AARTI SABHARWAL Vs. JITENDER SINGH CHOPRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant, who has filed a Suit for Maintenance under section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAM Act for short), has filed the present Appeal being aggrieved by the Order of the learned Single Judge, dismissing the Contempt Petition filed by her. Her complaint was that contrary to interim orders passed by the learned Single Judge, a sale Deed has been executed in respect of one of the properties which, according to her, belong to her husband. At the threshold, a Preliminary Objection has been taken pertaining to the maintainability of the present Appeal.

(2.) THERE is no gainsaying that keeping in view the punitive nature of orders that may be passed by the Court in contempt proceedings, which may include incarceration for a period upto six months, the Court must be fully satisfied that a party has wilfully disobeyed Court orders before punishment is delivered. Such a decision would perforce be predicated on a persuasive preponderance of evidence, as in the case of criminal proceedings. The natural sequel is that if the learned Single judge comes to the conclusion that contempt has not been committed, it would well-neigh be impossible for the Appellate court to reverse that finding. A person cannot be convicted for contempt of Court if one Judge finds that the case has not been sufficiently made good by the Complainant since the benefit of two opinions would invariably work in favour of the alleged contemnor. In our view, these two abiding principles of law find expression in Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 which speaks in the negative, namely, that an appeal is available only where punishment has been imposed on the contemnors and reads thus:-19. Appeals.

(3.) A detailed, yet perspicuous, exposition of the law can be found in Midnapore Peoples' Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Chunilal Nanda, (2006) 5 SCC 399. The decisions on this question have been discussed by their Lordships and thereafter the following digestion has been culled out:-11. The position emerging from these decisions, in regard to appeals against orders in contempt proceedings may be summarised thus: