DINESH SEHGAL, THROUGH SPA HOLDER vs SARABJIT SINGH CHADHA

Judgment text excerpt

$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 19th May, 2025 CONT.APP.(C) 6/2025 & CM APPLs. 11170/2025, 13005/2025 DINESH SEHGAL, THROUGH SPA HOLDER .....Appellant Through: Mr. Ravi Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Apoorv Agarwal, Ms. Divya Verma and Ms. Mohini Shah, Advocates along with Appellant in Person. versus SARABJIT SINGH CHADHA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rohit Gandhi, Mr. Adhish Srivastava, Mr. Siddharth Kaushik, Mr. Hargun Singh Kalra, Ms. Akshita Nigam and Mr. Varun Trivedi, Advocates, (Mob. 981861034), e- [email protected]. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral) 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present appeal has been filed on behalf of the Appellant under Section 9(1)(a) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 challenging the orders dated 11th February, 2025 and 3rd February, 2025 by which the ld. Single Judge has Signature Not Verified Signed By:NAMITA CONT.APP.(C) 6/2025 Page 1 of 9 DHYANI Signing Date:19.05.2025 19:08:29 held the Appellant guilty of contumacious conduct and deliberate violation of the Court orders. 3. A perusal of the impugned order dated 3rd February, 2025, reveals a consistent pattern of non-compliance with the undertakings furnished by the Appellant. The relevant portion of the said order is extracted below: “1. On 13.01.2025, this matter was called out for consideration of various applications. The Court in terms of paragraph no.3, prima facie, opined that the judgment-debtor was in violation of various orders passed by this Court. However, keeping in mind the submissions made by Mr. Anirban Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the judgment-debtor, who contended that the judgment-debt