Full Judgment Text
1
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CONMT.PET.(C) No. 277 OF 2012
IN
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No. 26541 OF 2005
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF PORT OF MUMBAI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
NIKHIL N GUPTA & ANR Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J.
1. Delay in filing the petition is condoned.
2. The contemnor - Nikhil N. Gupta is present in
Court. It is seen that the respondents and other
obstructionists have surrendered the vacant possesion
of the building in question to the petitioner.
3. On 23.04.2015, this Court had passed the
following order :-
JUDGMENT
"Heard.
Mr Shyam Divan, learned senior counsel
appearing for the respondents-contemnors,
has filed a list of occupants in the
disputed property which is taken on
record. He further submits that the
respondents-contemnors has already
deposited an amount of Rs. 82,37,958.11
before this Court which fact is not
disputed by counsel opposite who submits
Page 1
2
that the matter is now awaiting further
direction from the Executing Court, in
view of certain obstructions which the
bailiff had noted in the matter of
delivering vacant and peaceful possession
of the property to the decree holder. He
further submits that the Executing Court
has issued notices to the obstructionists,
some of whom have already been served but
some of them remain to be served and that
the matter is now coming up for hearing
before the Executing Court on Thursday,
the 7th May, 2015.
In the circumstances, we adjourn this
matter till after 7th May, 2015, to be
posted on Wednesday, the 15th July, 2015.
The Executing Court shall submit a report
JUDGMENT
as to the progress made in the execution
proceedings in the meantime."
4. The contemnor - respondent, who is present in
Court, has tendered an unconditional apology before
the Court. Having regard tothe affidavits filed and
the background of the various orders passed by this
Court, we are inclined to accept the apology and drop
the proceedings in contempt against the respondents.
Ordered accordingly.
Page 2
3
5. It is seen that pursuant to order dated
10.10.2014, the respondents have deposited an amount
of Rs. 82,37,958.11 before this Court and the same,
it is reported, is lying in the interest bearing
account.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that pursuant to the order dated
01.12.2015, the petitioner has already filed an
application before the Court of Small Causes at
Mumbai regarding mesne profits. Though, Mr. Shyam
Divan, learned senior counsel appearing for the
respondents, pursuasively submitted that the amount
deposited may be returned to the respondents and the
enquiry of mesne profits may take its own course, we
are not inclined to accept this submission.
7. We are informed by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the application now filed for the
JUDGMENT
mesne profits is for more than Re. One Crore. Be
that as it may, the amount lying in deposit before
the Registry of this Court shall be transferred to
the Court of Small Causes, Mumbai together with
interest in case No. LE & C Suit No. 355/481/1978.
However, it would be open to the respondents to file
an application, if so advised, regarding release or
otherwise of the amount ordered to be transferred to
the said Court.
Page 3
4
8. With the above observations and directions, the
contempt proceedings against the respondents are
dropped.
9. We make it clear that all contentions regarding
the mesne profits are left open to the parties to be
addressed before the Small Causes Court, Mumbai in
the pending proceedings. We also direct the Small
Causes Court, Mumbai to dispose of the proceedings
expeditiously and preferably within a period of one
year.
10. In view of the above, the Contempt Petition is
disposed of.
.......................J.
[ KURIAN JOSEPH ]
.......................J.
[ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ]
New Delhi;
February 02, 2016.
JUDGMENT
Page 4