ADMINISTRATOR SRINAGAR MUNICIPALITY Vs. KAIS GROUP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sub Judge (Judge, Small Cause Court) Srinagar on the application of Respondent No. 1, plaintiff before the Court below, issued notice to respondents 1 and 2 and to Secretary, Municipality Srinagar, for appearance in person to show cause why they may not be punished for contempt and in the meanwhile, directed them to comply with the order of temporary injunction dated 29-6-1996 as extended on 26-2-1997. Besides, the respondents were also required not to go ahead with this move to cancel the allotment to plaintiff of suit shops and their re-allotment pending the suit before the trial Court. These orders have been challenged by the Administrator and Executive Officer of the Srinagar Municipality.

(2.) The facts and circumstances in brief, necessary for our present purposes, are :-That the defendant-Executive Officer, of the Srinagar Municipality, published a notice for allotment of shops on auction, constructed under construction in Municipal Complexes at Budshah Chowk, and Karan Nagar. After negotiations, plaintiff-respondent No. 1 M/s. KAIS Group, succeeded in getting allotment of shops Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 at Karan Nagar and Shop Nos. 31, 32 and 34 at Lal Chowk on agreed terms and conditions, inter alia on term and condition that the payment shall be made in four instalments. The first instalment of 25% was paid as agreed. The second instalment of 25% of bid money was to be paid at the start of the work and the third instalment of 25% at the time of issuance of allotment order and the last instalment of 25% at the time of handing over of the shops. The plaintiffs issued two cheques dated 5-3-1996 and 31-11-1996, as asked by the defendants pursuant to the agreement, to be drawn at the Residence Road Branch of J and K Bank, at Srinagar. The cheques bounced, as per plaintiffs, for not being sent for clearance by the defendants in time and as per the defendants, the cheques were dishonoured. Even, on the day of impugned order, this 25%, payment of 2nd instalment has not been paid. Regarding non-payment of other two instalments there is no dispute. The plaintiffs smelling that the allotment of shops may not be cancelled for non-payments, filed the suit for declaration and perpetual injunction before the Court below. Co-extensive with the plaint, an application for ad-interim injunction was filed on 25-6-1996. The Court below vide order dated 29-6-1996, after finding prima facie case being made out by plaintiff restrained the defendants from invoking the penal clause 12/18 of the Tender Notice and directed the parties to maintain status quo till 8-7-1996, the next date when the matter was to come up before the trial Court. After 8-7-1996, the order lapsed as it was not revived till 26-2-1997, when the interim matter was taken on board by Court and the above direction of 26-2-1997 which otherwise had become extinct came to be extended till objections were filed by the other party and considered by the Court, below. Even after filing the written statement and taking objections to this order, the Court below did not find time to consider the objections and pass final order in the matter of ad-interim injunction in this case.

(3.) In the meanwhile, KIAS Group and its proprietors made an application under O. 39, Rule 2(a) of CPC read with S. 94 and S. 151, CPC, seeking punishment of one Shri G.M. Kaloo, the then Secretary, Municipality Srinagar for having violated the Court order dated 26-2-1997, in so far as the said Secretary after invoking the penal clause of the tender notice cancelled the bid. The trial Court issued notice to the said Secretary to appear in person before the Court below to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt of Court and in the meanwhile, the order of cancellation ordered by him was put on hold by issuance of restraint order.