ROSHAN LAL Vs. PUSHAP CHANDER JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TO appreciate the real point arising in this contempt petition, the chequered history of the case deserves to be noticed so that it can be found whether there has been wilful default on the part of the respondent in not honouring the undertaking tendered before the Supreme Court in pursuance of their order dated 2.2.1982 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 1453 of 1982, M/s Speedways Auto Industries through Pushap Chander Jain v. Roshan Lal and ors.

(2.) ON 1.5.1976, Roshan Lal landlord filed an ejectment petition to have the industrial premises No. Section 207, Industrial Area, Jullunder, City, vacated from his tenant Charanji Lal on two grounds :- 1. Non-payment of rent at the rate of Rs. 300/- per month from March, 1970 up to date. 2. Sub-letting by him to Pushap Chander Jain, who carried a business in the name of Speedways Auto Industries. In these proceedings Pushap Chander Jain (hereinafter referred to as Jain) filed a written statement and took up a plea that he was a direct tenant at the rate of Rs. 20/- per month. He also tendered the arrears of rent on the first date of hearing from March, 1970 upto date at the rate of Rs. 20/- per month. The landlord did not accept the tender to be valid both on the ground that it was not from the tenant and that it was a short tender as the agreed rent was Rs. 300 per month. After filing the written statement. Jain did not defend the case and he was proceeded ex-parte. On 27.8.1979, order of ejectment was passed by the Rent Controller, Jullunder on both the grounds. No appeal was filed against the ejectment order. However, Jain file an application under order 9, Rule 13 C.P.C. for setting aside the ex parte ejectment order. In those proceedings, Jain made the following statement.

(3.) AGAINST the aforesaid interim order, the decree-holder came to this Court in Civil Revision No. 614 of 1981, which was disposed of by this Court by order dated 18.12.1981. The revision petition was allowed, the order of the Executing Court was set aside and direction was given to the Executing Court to issue warrant of possession forthwith so that the possession of the premises is delivered to the decree-holder without any further delay. It was also ordered that the amount deposited by Jain be paid to the decree-holder by way of mesne profits without prejudice to his rights to claim higher amount in appropriate proceedings. Against the aforesaid order of this Court, Jain filed a Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 1453 of 1982, which has been noticed in the opening part of the judgment. In came up for preliminary hearing on 2.2.1982 and while dismissing the same, the following order was proposed :-