JAI CHAND SAWHNEY Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This contempt p tition has been preferred by the petitioner on the ground that the respondents have wilfully disobeyed and/or violated the undertaking given in the Court of Shri G.P. Thareja in Suit No. 379 /1976. A copy of the said order is placed on record.

(2.) l have been taken through the said judgment which contains the aforesaid undertaking given by the respondents. The undertaking was to the effect that the petitioner, who was the plaintiff therein, would not be evicted from the suit property, save and except by due process of law. In view of the aforesaid undertaking given by the Counsel for the respondents before the Court, the Court also ordered that the defendants/respondents would be bound by the aforesaid statement. The said suit was dismissed by the order dated 5.7.1978, after recording the aforesaid undertaking of the Counsel for the respondent.

(3.) lt is alleged in this p tition that in wilfui violation and disobedience of the aforesaid undertaking given to the Court, the respondents have been taking steps to evict the petitioner and, therefore, there is a wilful violation which gives rise to a cause of action to prefer apetition under the Contempt of Courts Act.