SONU BHATI & ANR. vs ARCHANA JAIN & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~83 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 13.01.2025 + LPA 23/2025 & CM No.1630/2025 SONU BHATI & ANR ..... Appellants Through: Mr. M.R. Shamshad, Sr. Advocate with Mr Mohd. Zaid, Mr Arijit Sarkar and Mr Mohd. Waseem Akram, Advocates Versus ARCHANA JAIN & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr Rohit Sharma with Mr Atul Agarwal and Mr Mayank Sethi, Advocates for R1. Mr Vikrant N. Goyal, Advocate for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA VIBHU BAKHRU, ACJ. (Oral) 1. The appellants have filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 16.12.2024 (hereafter the impugned order) passed by the learned Single Judge in Cont.Cas(C) No.1415/2023 captioned Archana Jain v. Rajinder Kumar Jain & Ors. whereby the learned Single Judge had found that respondent no.2 (arrayed as respondent no.1 in the contempt petition) had executed the sale deeds in respect of the property bearing No. WB-57 and WB-57A, Ganesh Nagar, Shakarpur, Delhi-110092 (hereafter the suit property), or part thereof, in willful defiance of the judicial orders. Accordingly, the learned Single Judge declared the sale Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAM KUMAR Signing Date:21.01.2025 LPA No.23/2025 Page 1 of 25 16:35:38 deeds executed in favour of the appellants as void ab initio. It is material to note that the impugned order was passed at an interim stage and the learned Single Judge expressly clarified that the submissions regarding sale consideration paid by the appellants (respondents no.4 and 5 in the contempt petition) would be examined on the next date of hearing. 2. Respondent no.1 (Ms Archana Jain) had filed the aforementioned contempt petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereafter the CC Act) for willful diso