Apex Law Journal
Apex Law Journal
An online law journal reporting latest and important judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.                                                                                                                         Click here to get free legal updates via email                                                                                                                          Click here to download forms (Address Form, List Of Documents and Memorandum Of Appearance)
User Name :
Password :
New Subscriber
Forgot Password
 

Editor

Neha Goel, Advocate

Advisory Board

S.C. Khunger, Advocate

Rohit Bansal, Advocate

Varinder Singh Kanwar, Advocate

Hittan Nehra, Advocate

Judgments on Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

Friday, October 28, 2011
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 2(b) — Civil contempt — Violation of the undertaking given by the appellant to the civil court at the most could be civil contempt and not criminal contempt.

 
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 2(b) — Civil contempt — A mere disobedience by a party to a civil action of a specific order made by the court in the suit is civil contempt for the reason that it is for the sole benefit of the other party to the civil suit.

 
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 13 and 2(b) — Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 23, Rule 3 — Consent dcecree — Violation of — Whether amounts to contempt ? — Held, yes — There is no distinction between the willful violation of the terms of a consent decree and willful violation of a decree which is passed on adjudication — However, it is discretion of the Court to initiate contempt proceedings — AIR 1950 Bombay 336 FB approved and AIR 1948 Calcutta 294 FB overruled.  

 
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 13 and Section 2(b) — Contention that contempt would not lie if the decree or order is executable — Held, not tenable — Merely because an order or decree is executable, would not take away the Court jurisdiction to deal with a matter under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, provided the Court is satisfied that the violation of the order  or decree is such, that if proved, it would warrant punishment under Section 13 of the Act on the ground that the contempt substantially interferes or tends substantially to interfere with the due course of justice.

 
Saturday, January 28, 2006
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 19 — Single Judge of High Court adjourned the contempt proceedings to enable the alleged contemnor to purge the contempt or else for deciding the quantum of punishment — Held, such an order of the learned Single Judge could not have been treated to be an interlocutory one — Such an order, held, is appealable — Division Bench was clearly wrong in refusing the right of appeal to the appellant.

 
Act Topic
Rule Citation
Keyword
 
Free Text Search
 
Follow us on :
(Best view with 1024x768 Resolution)
© All rights including Copyrights and rights of translations etc, reserved and vested exclusively with Deepak Publications. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronics, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, or stored in any retrival system of any nature without the written permission of the copyright owner.

By using this site, you (and any entity on whose behalf your are acting) are consenting to be bound by Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy & Disclaimer Clause.