Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
In contempt of a custody order of the Court, the alleged contemnor had taken the children from Hyderabad to Bhopal without the permission of the contempt petitioner.
“Not only has the petitioner failed to indicate how she has been intentionally victimized in the matter at hand, she has also made scandalous remarks attacking the integrity of the justice dispensation mechanism.”
The contemnor has scandalised and lowered down the authority of the Court, which amounts to interference in the administration of justice.
The cause of action to file the present petition arose when respondent 1 failed to pay the balance amount to the petitioner by 31-12-2012 as per clause (vi) of the compromise agreement based on which the consent decree dated 01-06-2009 was passed.
The Court criticized the authorities for their prolonged inertia despite prior orders and sanctioned plans.
The Court sternly noted that casual, lethargic and insensitive approach on the part of the authorities towards the compliance of the orders and directions of the courts cannot be tolerated.
Supreme Court reiterated that in addition to punishing a contemnor for disobeying its orders, the Court can also ensure that such a contemnor does not continue to enjoy the benefits of his disobedience by merely suffering the punishment meted out to him.
“Respondent has used utter derogatory language for the Single Judge bench to the extent of saying that the Single Judge is a ‘thief’ and he has full proof of the same.”
The Court directed the State authorities to implement the recommendations made by the Shetty Commission within the period of three months.
by B. Shravanth Shanker† and Monalisa Kosaria††
Delhi High Court: Expressing that, attempts to circumvent or undermine judicial decisions need to be viewed seriously in order to ensure that
by Raghavendra S. Srivatsa*