{"id":344006,"date":"2025-03-20T16:00:27","date_gmt":"2025-03-20T10:30:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=344006"},"modified":"2025-03-25T09:27:15","modified_gmt":"2025-03-25T03:57:15","slug":"no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/","title":{"rendered":"No fresh cause of action arises from continuing non-compliance with consent decree; Delhi High Court dismisses contempt petition being time-barred"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> A petition was filed by the petitioner under Sections 10<\/a> and 12<\/a> of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971<\/a> seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for the alleged wilful disobedience and disregard of the consent decree dated 01-06-2009 passed by this Court. Dharmesh Sharma, J., held that the petition was ex facie barred by limitation under Section 20<\/a> of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971<\/a>, as the cause of action arose when the respondent failed to pay the balance amount by 31-12-2012.<\/p>\n

The case arises from a commercial dispute between the petitioner and Polar Industries Limited (PIL). The petitioner had filed a recovery suit for Rs. 1,38,79,026 against PIL, and in order to amicably resolve the dispute, both parties entered into a compromise agreement on 13-01-2009. The Court, after reviewing the agreement, decreed the suit in its terms on 01-06-2009. The agreement outlined various obligations for PIL and its chairman and managing director, Respondent 1. While most clauses of the agreement were complied with, the petitioner alleged non-compliance with Clause (vi) which required the transfer of 15.72% shares in Vinsa Electricals Private Limited (Vinsa), owned by Respondent 2 to the petitioner by 03-06-2010. Despite the release of these shares from Eight Capital in 2010, the transfer did not occur.<\/p>\n

Due to the alleged breach, the petitioner filed an execution petition against PIL and the respondent seeking the enforcement of the consent decree. The petitioner claimed that an amount of Rs. 26.41 crore was due. As an interim measure, the Court restrained the respondents from pledging or selling 15.72% of Vinsa’s equity shares and the Polar brand. However, in a twist, the petitioner discovered in 2020 that Respondent 2 had executed a Deed of Pledge on 25-04-2012, transferring 51% of Vinsa’s shares to the proposed Respondent 5 under a Business Exposure Agreement dated 24-04-2012. This transfer occurred despite the court’s restraining orders. Subsequently, on 27-01-2020, 50,224 shares of Respondent 2 in Vinsa were transferred to respondent 5 reducing her shareholding below the 15.72% threshold mandated by the Court. An affidavit filed by Respondent 2 in April 2022 confirmed that all her shares were now held by respondent 5, Virat Leasing Ltd. Aggrieved by the alleged deliberate and willful disobedience of the Court’s orders, the petitioner filed the present contempt petition.<\/p>\n

On the aspect whether the petition is barred by limitation, the Court noted that the primary allegation concerns non-compliance with Clause (vi) of the compromise agreement dated 13-01-2009, which was made a part of the consent decree dated 01.06.2009. The clause stipulated that the transfer of 15.72% shares of Vinsa Electricals Private Limited was to be completed by 30-06-2010, and in case of failure, the respondent was required to pay the balance amount by 31-12-2012. Since the alleged non-compliance occurred upon the respondent’s failure to pay the balance by 31-12-2012, the petitioner had one year from that date, i.e., until 31-12-2013, to file the contempt petition. However, the petition was filed in 2020, making it ex facie time barred.<\/p>\n

The petitioner argued that the cause of action arose on 27-01-2020, when the respondent transferred the shares to a third party, thereby violating court orders. However, the Court rejected this argument, noting that the petition had already been filed on 08-01-2020, before the alleged act of transfer. Additionally, the Court observed that the petitioner was attempting to expand the scope of the petition by citing subsequent events, which were not mentioned in the original plea. The petitioner’s reliance on the concept of a “continuing wrong” was also dismissed. The Court emphasized that a continuing wrong requires the injury to accrue from day to day. In this case, the non-payment constituted a completed breach as of 31-12-2012, and the continued non-compliance did not amount to a fresh cause of action. Accordingly, the Court ruled that the petition was time-barred and could not be entertained.<\/p>\n

The Court remarked that “there is no gainsaying that the power to punish for contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act is not only discretionary but is also to be used sparingly by this Court. A trend which has been noticed by this Court is that parties invariably try to invoke the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971<\/a>, in order to get orders implemented while there is already a machinery provided under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908<\/a>, for the purpose of getting orders, decrees or directions executed.”<\/span><\/p>\n

Thus, the Court held the present contempt proceedings are not maintainable for being barred by limitation.<\/p>\n

[Sunil Gupta v. Anil Aggarwal, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 1659<\/a>, decided on 18-03-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

Mr. Gaurav Mitra, Mr. Dushyant Kumar and Mr. Ishan Roy Chowdhary, Advocates for petitioner<\/p>\n

Mr. Raghavendra Mohan Bajaj, Ms. Garima Bajaj, Mr. Kumar Karan and Mr. Sagun Agarwal, Advs. for R-1. Ms. Srishty Kaul, Adv. for R-2. Mr. Rajshekhar Rao, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Kunal Vajani, Mr. Kunal Mimani, Mr. Shubhang Tandon, Ms. Shraddha Chirania and Mr. Mridul Yovesh Suri, Advs. for R-3 and R-4<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

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.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67516,"featured_media":314886,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[9501,45316,44784,30393,3456,2543,36222,32057,80006,30572],"class_list":["post-344006","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-civil-contempt","tag-consent-decree","tag-contempt-of-courts-act","tag-contempt-petition","tag-criminal_contempt","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-law-of-limitation","tag-limitation-period","tag-non-compliance-of-order","tag-time-barred"],"yoast_head":"\nNo Fresh Cause of Action from Continuing Non-Compliance with Consent Decree: Delhi HC Dismisses Time-Barred Contempt Petition<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court rules that no fresh cause of action arises from continued non-compliance with a consent decree. Contempt petition dismissed as time-barred under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"No fresh cause of action arises from continuing non-compliance with consent decree; Delhi High Court dismisses contempt petition being time-barred\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court rules that no fresh cause of action arises from continued non-compliance with a consent decree. Contempt petition dismissed as time-barred under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-03-20T10:30:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-03-25T03:57:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"No fresh cause of action arises from continuing non-compliance with consent decree; Delhi High Court dismisses contempt petition being time-barred\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Arunima\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/20\\\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/20\\\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Arunima\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\"},\"headline\":\"No fresh cause of action arises from continuing non-compliance with consent decree; Delhi High Court dismisses contempt petition being time-barred\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-03-20T10:30:27+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-03-25T03:57:15+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/20\\\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":850,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/20\\\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"civil contempt\",\"consent decree\",\"Contempt of Courts Act\",\"contempt petition\",\"criminal contempt\",\"Delhi High Court\",\"Law of Limitation\",\"Limitation Period\",\"Non compliance of order\",\"time-barred\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"High Courts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/20\\\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/20\\\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/20\\\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\\\/\",\"name\":\"No Fresh Cause of Action from Continuing Non-Compliance with Consent Decree: Delhi HC Dismisses Time-Barred Contempt Petition\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/20\\\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/20\\\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-03-20T10:30:27+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-03-25T03:57:15+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court rules that no fresh cause of action arises from continued non-compliance with a consent decree. Contempt petition dismissed as time-barred under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/20\\\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/20\\\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/20\\\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/03\\\/20\\\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"No fresh cause of action arises from continuing non-compliance with consent decree; Delhi High Court dismisses contempt petition being time-barred\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb\",\"name\":\"Arunima\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Arunima\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/scc-editor_9\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"No Fresh Cause of Action from Continuing Non-Compliance with Consent Decree: Delhi HC Dismisses Time-Barred Contempt Petition","description":"Delhi High Court rules that no fresh cause of action arises from continued non-compliance with a consent decree. Contempt petition dismissed as time-barred under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"No fresh cause of action arises from continuing non-compliance with consent decree; Delhi High Court dismisses contempt petition being time-barred","og_description":"Delhi High Court rules that no fresh cause of action arises from continued non-compliance with a consent decree. Contempt petition dismissed as time-barred under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-03-20T10:30:27+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-03-25T03:57:15+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Arunima","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"No fresh cause of action arises from continuing non-compliance with consent decree; Delhi High Court dismisses contempt petition being time-barred","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Arunima","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/"},"author":{"name":"Arunima","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb"},"headline":"No fresh cause of action arises from continuing non-compliance with consent decree; Delhi High Court dismisses contempt petition being time-barred","datePublished":"2025-03-20T10:30:27+00:00","dateModified":"2025-03-25T03:57:15+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/"},"wordCount":850,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","keywords":["civil contempt","consent decree","Contempt of Courts Act","contempt petition","criminal contempt","Delhi High Court","Law of Limitation","Limitation Period","Non compliance of order","time-barred"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","High Courts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/","name":"No Fresh Cause of Action from Continuing Non-Compliance with Consent Decree: Delhi HC Dismisses Time-Barred Contempt Petition","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2025-03-20T10:30:27+00:00","dateModified":"2025-03-25T03:57:15+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb"},"description":"Delhi High Court rules that no fresh cause of action arises from continued non-compliance with a consent decree. Contempt petition dismissed as time-barred under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/20\/no-fresh-cause-of-action-continuing-non-compliance-consent-decree-delhi-hc-dismisses-contempt-petition\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"No fresh cause of action arises from continuing non-compliance with consent decree; Delhi High Court dismisses contempt petition being time-barred"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/12b21fd8f65a572f39f27151710e16cb","name":"Arunima","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8375ad8b08b1cbd970f4484d3218d81f3222a0ee3e463210f657780cb13e9569?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Arunima"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor_9\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":265637,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/04\/20\/disobedience-of-an-order-of-court-if-permitted-will-result-in-striking-at-root-of-rule-of-law-civil-contempt-delhi-high-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":344006,"position":0},"title":"[Civil Contempt] Disobedience of an order of Court, if permitted, will result in striking at root of rule of law: Del HC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 20, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Whether the third party can be absolved from contempt if they are informed that their conduct would violate the Court order, Subramonium Prasad, J., reiterated the well-settled position that though broadly a person who is not a party to the proceedings cannot be proceeded against for violation\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":238278,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/09\/divorce-by-mutual-consent-and-contempt-of-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":344006,"position":1},"title":"Divorce by Mutual Consent and Contempt of Court","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 9, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"by Achal Gupta*","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/divorce-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/divorce-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/divorce-3.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/divorce-3.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/divorce-3.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":279665,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/12\/15\/madras-high-court-dismisses-contempt-proceedings-against-presiding-officer-of-family-court-imposes-rs-50000-costs-on-the-petitioner-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":344006,"position":2},"title":"Madras High Court dismisses contempt proceedings against presiding officer of family Court; Imposes Rs. 50,000 costs on the petitioner","author":"Editor","date":"December 15, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court held that the contempt petition is not maintainable and barred by limitation. Thus, dismissed contempt proceedings against the presiding officer of Family Court as he was not the presiding officer when the order was passed.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madras High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/Madras-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":242479,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/01\/20\/sc-wilful-disobedience-or-wilful-breach-are-these-necessary-requisites-for-bringing-in-action-for-civil-contempt-read-on\/","url_meta":{"origin":344006,"position":3},"title":"SC | Wilful disobedience or Wilful breach: Are these necessary requisites for bringing in action for ‘Civil Contempt’? Read on","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 20, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: B.R. Gavai, J., while addressing a contempt petition expressed that: \u201c\u2026contempt proceeding is not like an execution proceeding under the Code of Civil Procedure.\u201d \u201c\u2026contempt proceedings are quasi-criminal in nature and the standard of proof required is in the same manner as in the other criminal cases.\u201d \u201cA\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":223803,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/03\/ker-hc-petition-for-non-compliance-of-the-earlier-judgment-dismissed-petitioner-directed-to-seek-remedy-under-contempt-of-courts-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":344006,"position":4},"title":"Ker HC | Petition for non-compliance of earlier judgment dismissed; petitioner directed to seek remedy under Contempt of Courts Act","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 3, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: C.S. Dias, J. dismissed a writ petition filed by the petitioner on the basis that once any judgment is in force, a new petition cannot be filed for the same cause of action. The petitioner had filed another petition before the instant petition, where the Court rendered\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":284154,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/17\/cognizance-of-criminal-contempt-by-single-judge-of-a-high-court-under-the-contempt-of-courts-act-1971-in-absence-of-any-rules-framed-by-the-high-court-permissibility\/","url_meta":{"origin":344006,"position":5},"title":"Cognizance of Criminal Contempt by Single Judge of a High Court under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 in Absence of Any Rules Framed by the High Court \u2014 Permissibility","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 17, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"by B. Shravanth Shanker\u2020 and Monalisa Kosaria\u2020\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-411.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/344006","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67516"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=344006"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/344006\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314886"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=344006"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=344006"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=344006"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}