GNCTD v. Baldev Singh & Ors.

1. This appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), challenging the judgment dated 16.08.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in CONT CAS(C) 776/2019 titled Baldev Singh & Ors. v. Neha Bansal &Anr., which inter alia directs as under:-

petitioner in the revenue record within 15 days from today, failing which the Deputy Commissioner concerned shall be personally liable to be held guilty of contempt of this Court and may be imposed with penalty/cost of Rs.1,000/- per day of default which shall be recovered from his salary.”

2. A reading of the above paragraph would clearly show that the appellant has still not been found guilty of contempt nor any punishment has been imposed on the appellant.

3. The Supreme Court in Midnapore Peoples' Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Chunilal Nanda, (2006) 5 SCC 399 has clarified that an appeal is maintainable only against an order of the High Court passed in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt. The Supreme Court has held as under:-

IV. Any direction issued or decision made by the High Court on the merits of a dispute between the parties, will not be in the exercise of "jurisdiction to punish for contempt" and, therefore, not appealable under Section 19 of the CC Act. The only exception is where such direction or decision is incidental to or inextricably connected with the order punishing for contempt, In which event the appeal under Section 19 of the Act, can also encompass the incidental or inextricably connected directions.

V. If the High Court, for whatsoever reason, decides an issue or makes any direction, relating to the merits of the dispute between the parties, in a contempt proceedings, the aggrieved person is not without remedy. Such an order is open to challenge in an intracourt appeal (if the order was of a learned Single Judge and there is a provision for an intra-court appeal), or by seeking special leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India (in other cases).”

4. The Supreme Court in Ajay Kumar Bhalla and Others v. Prakash Kumar Dixit, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1874, again reiterated that an appeal under Section 19 is maintainable only against an order imposing punishment for contempt.

5. In the present case, the learned Single Judge has still not held the appellant guilty of contempt nor has imposed any punishment on the appellant.

6. In our view, therefore, the present appeal at this stage is not maintainable. The same is accordingly dismissed.