Party Availing Legal Remedies Against Unfavourable Order Can't Be Pressurised By Initiating Contempt Action: Jammu and Kashmir High Court

A party has a right to avail the appropriate remedy before the higher forum under law and right to avail the appropriate remedy cannot be throttled by any process whatsoever, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has observed while dismissing a contempt petition.

The applicant claimed that Respondents were trying to obstruct the administration of justice by avoiding a payment order and approaching various authorities against it.

Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal however observed that the right to avail the appropriate remedy as envisaged under law can by no stretch of imagination can be construed as an obstruction in the course of justice.

The applicant herein had obtained an order in his favour issued by the Principal District Judge of Anantnag in 2010, in terms of which he had directed the District Collector Land Acquisition to deposit a certain amount of money in court along with interest. The order was challenged by the respondents in a writ petition and later in a Letters Patent Appeal, both of which were dismissed by the High Court.

The Applicant submitted that the respondents, in an attempt to avoid paying the amount ordered by the court, approached various government officials, however, in a High-Level Meeting was held under the Chairmanship of the Chief Secretary, it was decided that the amount would be deposited in the court to comply with the order.

The Applicant argued that despite the matter being settled between the parties, the respondents failed to comply with the order, thereby obstructing the administration of justice. The Applicant further submitted that the respondents' failure to comply with the court order amounts to contempt of court and accordingly sought indulgence of the court to hold the respondents accountable for their actions.

Deliberating on the matter the court observed that the applicant had tried to confuse the court by projecting that since the remedy availed against the order passed by the Principal District Judge, Anantnag, had been lost by the respondents up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the order dated 27.03.2010 was executable, independent of the reference proceedings pending disposal before the court.

The court pointed that the interim orders including order dated 27.03.2010, passed during the pendency of the reference proceedings merged with the final order dated 15.09.2018, by directing the Department to pay enhanced compensation to the landowners.

The bench noted that the reference court under Section 18 of the Act disposed of the reference vide judgment dated Sep 15th 2018, directing the Department to pay enhanced compensation to the land owners. Aggrieved of the same the respondents had filed an appeal before the court challenging the judgment dated 15.09.2018, passed by the reference court, and the court stayed the impugned judgment/decree subject to deposit of 50% of the awarded amount, the bench recorded.

The court also noted that the respondents had availed yet another remedy under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by way of filing a petition which was registered as CM(M) No. 178/2022, whereby the challenge was made to the reference Court‟s fresh orders and the High court had stayed these fresh orders of the reference court.

“The applicant instead of agitating the matter in the aforesaid petitions, has chosen the remedy of filing the present contempt petition with a view to apply pressure tactics by seeking a prayer in the present contempt petition with regard to the dismissal...”, the bench said.

Observing that the respondents have availed the legal remedies and have got the interim orders in their favour which continues to be operative as on date, the court said that the applicant instead of contesting his right before the appropriate proceedings has chosen to file the present petition by way of camouflage with a view to apply pressure tactics and by seeking dismissal of the petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by respondents .

Elaborating further on the matter the court said that the Applicant with a view to mislead this Court and to apply pressure tactics has filed the present contempt petition for initiation of contempt proceedings instead of contesting the petitions which are pending before this Court and in which the interim orders have been passed and the applicant being aware of the proceedings has chosen not to contest the aforesaid petitions and instead has filed the present contempt petition with a view to apply pressure tactics.

“Having failed to get the interim order vacated before this Court in the aforesaid proceedings, the Applicant has approached this Court by filling the present contempt petition on false and flimsy grounds which is nothing but a sheer abuse of process of Court and the contempt petition, as such, is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed”, the bench underscored.

Highlighting the abuse of the process of law resorted to by the petitioners the bench found it a fit case where costs can be imposed upon the applicant to deprecate such practice and accordingly a costs of Rs. 25,000/- was imposed upon the Applicant.

Accordingly, the present contempt petition is dismissed with costs as quantified above and the contempt proceedings initiated against respondents are dropped, the bench concluded.

Case Title: Gull Mohammad Bhat Vs Raj Kumar Goyal and others

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 87

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment