(1.) Aggrieved by order dtd. 14/8/2021 passed by the court of learned Ist Additional District Judge, Jammu, whereby the court dismissed the contempt petition filed by the petitioner herein in the appeal, the present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The contention raised by the petitioner is that the learned court has not decided the contempt petition legally as the written arguments, additional photographs and the videographic evidence filed by the petitioner herein in the contempt petition clearly brings out the allegation against the respondent for commission of contempt of court. The precise submission is that the court did not comprehend the controversy in its right perspective and dismissed the contempt petition filed by the petitioner herein.
(2.) The learned counsels appearing for the respondents have argued that the present petition is not maintainable as the court after taking into consideration all the circumstances dismissed the contempt petition and no fault can be found in the same. The petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable against the order impugned in the present petition.
(3.) It appears from the record that the appellate court as interim measure directed the respondents to maintain status quo with regard to the title and further directed the respondent not to alienate or create any third party interest in the suit property. The appellate court while dismissing the contempt application held that it is for the contemnor to prove the contempt allegedly committed by the respondent No.2. It was further held that the petitioner did not lead any evidence in order to prove the contempt. It was specifically held in the impugned order that the petitioner failed to lead any evidence even to the extent that the respondent No.1 has alienated and created any third party interest in the suit property to the other respondents and that the photographic evidence cannot be the basis for proving the allegation.