Full Judgment Text
2025 INSC 567
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
INHERENT JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 712 OF 2023
IN
SLP (CIVIL) NO. 17433 OF 2021
M/S CHITHRA WOODS MANORS
WELFARE ASSOCIATION PETITIONER (S)
VERSUS
SHAJI AUGUSTINE ALLEGED CONTEMNOR/RESPONDENT
J U D G M E N T
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J .
1. The instant Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 712 of 2023
(hereinafter referred to as “instant Petition”) in SLP (C) No.
17433 of 2021 (hereinafter referred to as “main Petition”)
was filed during its pendency by M/s Chithra Woods
Manors Welfare Association, being the Respondent No. 01
therein (hereinafter referred to as “Petitioner Association”),
alleging non-payment of arrears of use and occupation
charges for period between 20.09.2021 and 31.11.2022 in
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
DEEPAK SINGH
Date: 2025.04.25
10:04:43 IST
Reason:
six monthly instalments beginning 31.12.2022, as
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 1 of 19
directed by this Court vide Order dated 07.11.2022 in the
main Petition.
2. This petition was then tagged along with the main Petition
vide Order dated 24.02.2023 and eventually, owing to the
said non-payment of arrears, the main Petition was
disposed of as this Court observed to not entertain the
prayer of Mr Shaji Augustine, the Petitioner therein
(hereinafter referred to as “Respondent-Contemnor”) but
the proceedings in instant Petition sustained.
3. Facts forming the backdrop of the instant Petition are that
the Petitioner Association is owner of the decree scheduled
building, consisting of 96 furnished studio apartments, at
Munnar, Kerala (hereinafter referred to as the “said
Property”). An agreement was entered between the
Petitioner Association and Respondent-Contemnor on
26.01.2014, permitting the latter to occupy and use the
said Property for a period of 10 years as against payment
of licence fees of INR 12 Lakhs per month (hereinafter
referred to as the “said Agreement).
4. Within a short period of entering into the said Agreement,
Respondent-Contemnor defaulted in payment of the
license fees. On persistent default, Petitioner Association
was constrained to institute OS No.30 of 2015 before the
Sub Court at Thodupuzha, Kerala for realization of the
arrears and other reliefs. As there was an arbitration
clause in the said Agreement and on consent of the parties
herein, the dispute was referred to a Sole Arbitrator.
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 2 of 19
5. Before the Sole Arbitrator, the Petitioner Association
moved I.A. No. 01 of 2016 under Section 17 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred
to as “A&C Act”), seeking direction to the Respondent-
Contemnor to deposit INR 1,65,73,459/- (Rupees One
crore Sixty-Five Lakhs Seventy-Three Thousand Four
Hundred Fifty-Nine only) during pendency of the
proceedings. The same was partially allowed vide Order
dated 23.06.2016 with direction to deposit INR
1,36,49,439/- (Rupees One crore Thirty-Six Lakhs Forty-
Nine Thousand Four Hundred Thirty-Nine only) and per
undertaking of the Respondent-Contemnor, payment of
INR 12 lakhs per mensem for month of June 2016
th
onwards, on or before the 10 of the succeeding month,
pending disposal of the proceedings.
6. Both Respondent-Contemnor and Petitioner Association
moved in appeal under Section 37 of the A&C Act before
the District Court at Ernakulam, Kerala. A Common Order
dated 21.01.2017 was passed, staying the proceedings
before the Sole Arbitrator with reiteration of direction to
Respondent-Contemnor to pay arrears at the rate of INR
12 Lakhs per month with effect from 08.09.2016 with a
further order to continue to pay INR 12 Lakhs per month
towards monthly license fee.
7. This common order was challenged by the Respondent-
Contemnor before the High Court of Kerala in O.P. (C) No
552 of 2017. The matter was referred for mediation at the
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 3 of 19
request of the parties. The said mediation proceedings,
lead to a Compromise dated 03.04.2017 (hereinafter
referred to as the “Settlement Agreement”), Petitioner
Association agreed to reduce the monthly license fees to
INR 8 Lakhs per month. Arrears, as claimed before the Sole
Arbitrator, were also reduced from INR 1,65,73,439/- to
INR 75 Lakhs. Moreover, it was specifically recorded that
the settlement entered between the parties would form
part of the judgment. There was a specific clause that in
case of default by any of the parties to any of the terms of
the agreement the other would be entitled to proceed
against the other party. The parties resolved their
disputes, and the terms of settlement arrived at between
them were accepted by the High Court of Kerala and were
incorporated in the Order dated 11.04.2017.
8. On default on the part of the Respondent-Contemnor in
making payment through a promissory note, as per the
Settlement Agreement, Petitioner Association preferred
Execution Petition No. 58 of 2020 on 11.03.2020, no
money was paid by the Respondent-Contemnor with effect
from the month of July 2018. The Respondent-Contemnor
was unsuccessful before the District Court in EA No. 14 of
2021 in its challenge to the maintainability of the
execution petition. The Execution Court passed an Order
dated 23.03.2021, giving an instalment facility to the
Respondent-Contemnor for payments of its arrears, with
the first being due on 01.06.2021 and the last being
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 4 of 19
01.09.2021. Furthermore, the amount of arrears being
undisputed, and nothing having been paid, the Execution
Court ordered delivery of the said Property. The
Respondent-Contemnor challenged the order of the
Execution Court before the High Court of Kerala, which
was dismissed vide Judgment dated 20.09.2021.
9. It is at this stage that the respondent preferred the main
Petition before this Court challenging the Judgment dated
20.09.2021. Notice was issued vide Order dated
12.11.2021 and subsequently, status quo was ordered
vide Order dated 04.02.2022 vis-à-vis the said Property.
The matter ultimately came for consideration on
07.11.2022 when following Order was passed:-
“List on a non-miscellaneous day in the month of
March, 2023.
In the meanwhile, as an interim measure, we are
inclined to direct that the petitioner will pay Rs. 12
lakhs per month to the respondent as use and
occupation charges w.e.f. 20.09.2021 (the date of the
impugned judgment). As prayed on behalf of the
petitioner, the arrears @ Rs. 12 lakhs per month from
20.09.2021 till 31.11.2022, would be paid in six
monthly instalments beginning 31.12.2022. The
petitioner would also continue to make payment of Rs.
th
12 lakhs per month in the future by the 10 day of each
succeeding calendar month.
The payment would be subject to the outcome of the
present Special Leave Petition.”
10. A perusal of the above would show that a direction was
issued to the Respondent-Contemnor to pay arrears for the
period specified therein in six monthly instalments
beginning from 31.12.2022, totalling to INR 172 Lakhs, at
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 5 of 19
the rate of INR 12 Lakhs per month, and being INR 28.60
Lakhs per instalment.
11. Pursuant to the Order dated 07.11.2022, the Respondent-
Contemnor sent an e-mail to the Petitioner Association
containing a letter dated 17.11.2022 seeking the
concerned account details of the Petitioner Association for
the Respondent-Contemnor to transfer the arrears
enabling him to affect compliance with Order dated
07.11.2022 passed by this Court. The said details were
provided by the Petitioner Association on 14.12.2022 in
response to the aforesaid e-mail. Despite getting the
required information, no amount was paid to the Petitioner
Association and yet, the Respondent-Contemnor
continued to enjoy and occupy the said Property. It is
apparent that the intention on the part of the Respondent-
Contemnor was not to do away with the possession of the
said Property and to hold on to it owing to his act of moving
the main Petition for challenging the handing over of the
possession of the said Property.
12. Petitioner Association asserts that deliberate action on
behalf of the respondent in not complying with the
direction issued by this Court on 17.11.2022 with
continuous default on his part amounts to civil contempt
which is deliberate and intentional disobedience of the
order of this Court.
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 6 of 19
13. Subsequently, on 01.12.2023, when both the main
Petition and instant Petition were taken up for hearing
following order was passed:-
“The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
states that the petitioner has already vacated the
premises subject matter of this Special Leave Petition.
th
We find that the order dated 7 November, 2022
directing the petitioner to deposit money has not been
complied with. The petitioner has expressed inability to
pay the money. The jurisdiction of this Court under
Article 136 of the Constitution of India is always
discretionary.
Considering the conduct of the petitioner of not paying
th
a single farthing after 7 November, 2022, we decline
to entertain this Special Leave Petition and the same is
accordingly dismissed.
However, the question of law is kept open to be
considered in an appropriate case.
Pending application also stand disposed of.
CONMT. PET. (C) No. 712/2023 in SLP(C) No.
17433/2021.
nd
List on 22 January, 2024.”
14. With the main Petition having been dismissed, the instant
Petition continued to survive and was taken up for hearing
on various dates. Respondent-Contemnor was called upon
by this Court on 15.03.2024 to file an affidavit giving
details of all his movable and immovable assets as also
that of his immediate family members along with the
necessary documents. This was in light of the statement of
the counsel of the Respondent-Contemnor that he is not
in a position to deposit any amount.
15. After filing of the affidavit by the Respondent-Contemnor
and on perusal thereof this Court on 12.09.2024 found the
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 7 of 19
Respondent-Contemnor, who was appearing through
video conferencing, of having committed wilful breach of
the directions contained in the Order dated 07.11.2022.
The Respondent-Contemnor was ordered to be heard on
the said charge as no amount had been paid by him and
was directed to be personally present in Court. The
Respondent-Contemnor subsequently appeared and an
opportunity was given to comply with the Order while
being heard on charge. Owing to his non-intention to
comply, the case was kept reserved for orders.
16. Stand of the Respondent-Contemnor in the affidavit which
has been filed is that the compliance of the Order dated
07.11.2022 passed by this Court is beyond his financial
and physical capabilities. It is thus, neither deliberate nor
an intentional non-compliance of the order and is only on
account of his penury. He has, thus, prayed for dropping
of the current contempt proceedings.
17. Counsel for the Petitioner Association, on the other hand,
has asserted that the conduct of the Respondent-
Contemnor from the very beginning was clearly indicative
of an attempt on the part of the Respondent-Contemnor to
hold on to the possession of the said Property. Despite the
Settlement Agreement, which has attained finality by
virtue of not being challenged, to retain the possession of
the said Property, Respondent-Contemnor has constantly
litigated across forums. Such an act on part of the
Respondent-Contemnor clearly showed that without
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 8 of 19
making payment of the amount due to the petitioners, he
was reaping the fruits of the scheduled property in
violation of the terms of settlement.
18. Had it not been a viable preposition, the possession could
have been easily handed over by the Respondent-
Contemnor. Having taken benefit of the said Property,
Respondent-Contemnor cannot be now permitted to take
the plea of penury. Rather, it is an intentional non-
compliance of the directions issued by this Court even
after partial monetary benefit had been conferred upon
him vide Order dated 07.11.2022. Even till date no
payment whatsoever has been made which clearly reflects
the malafide of the Respondent-Contemnor. A reference is
also made to the Order dated 04.02.2022 when status quo
was ordered by this Court in relation to the property in
question to be maintained. Prayer has thus been made for
punishing the Respondent-Contemnor for having
committed contempt of this Court’s Order dated
07.11.2022.
19. Having considered the submissions made by the counsels
for the parties, we are of the considered view that the
Respondent-Contemnor has deliberately and with
malafide intention, not only mislead and misused the
process of the courts but has also intentionally violated
the order passed by this Court on 07.11.2022 by not
making the payment as directed therein.
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 9 of 19
20. At the prospect of reiteration of the factual matrix, the
conduct of the Respondent-Contemnor since the
Settlement Agreement reflects his patent intent to retain
the said Property and this indicates that the business
proposition was not only a viable one but was yielding
profits. No person with a modest business acumen would
continue with a loss-causing endeavour. Respondent-
Contemnor has nowhere reflected the receipts from the
business being undertaken in the said Property.
21. Subsequently, he even sought time from the Execution
Court, but failed to comply, prompting an order for delivery
of possession of the said Property. This, he then challenged
through Revision Petition before the High Court of Kerala
and ultimately before this Court through the main
Petition.
22. It was on his insistence that this Court ordered status quo
vide Order dated 04.02.2022. However, he neither paid the
dues nor complied with the subsequent Order dated
07.11.2022 mandating payment of INR 12 lakhs per
month from 20.09.2021 and arrears in instalments.
23. The e-mail dated 17.11.2022, which was addressed to the
Petitioner Association by the Respondent-Contemnor,
seeking account details for the concerned amount to be
transferred, was responded accordingly by the Petitioner
Association vide e-mail dated 26.11.2022. Despite all this,
not even a rupee was credited to the account of the
Petitioner Association.
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 10 of 19
24. Faced with this situation, Petitioner Association had no
option but to file the instant Petition before this Court
leading to issuance of notice on 24.02.2023 along with an
opportunity to the Respondent-Contemnor to remedy the
default. After various dates, the matter ultimately came for
hearing on 01.12.2023, when, owing to non-compliance of
Order dated 07.11.2022 for depositing money, the main
Petition was dismissed and the instant Petition survived.
25. It is only on 15.03.2024 that for the first time counsel for
the Respondent-Contemnor stated that he was not in a
position to deposit any amount, whereupon this Court
called for details of his immovable and movable assets and
that of his immediate family members, along with
necessary documents. Physical presence of the
Respondent-Contemnor was also ordered in Court on the
next date of hearing.
26. Respondent-Contemnor appeared through video
conference in Court on 12.07.2024 when the affidavit
which was filed by the respondent-contemnor was
considered. On perusal thereof, Court found the
Respondent-Contemnor having committed a wilful breach
of the directions contained in the order dated 07.11.2022.
He was, therefore, called upon to face the said charge and
with an intention to give him an opportunity of being
heard. The matter was listed for hearing with a direction
to the contemnor to personally remain present before the
Court. The contemnor was heard in person in Court and
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 11 of 19
was again given an opportunity to comply with the order
of which he had committed contempt i.e. non-payment of
the amount and the arrears. The contemnor did not
express any remorse nor showed any intention to comply
with the order passed by this Court rather asserted that
he was not in a position to make any payment. It is in these
circumstances that the matter is being considered.
27. The e-mail dated 17.11.2022 intrinsically reflects financial
capability and liquidity at hands of the Respondent-
Contemnor. Had the Respondent-Contemnor been in dire
financial difficulty, the said communication would not
have come to the fore. Besides, had it been that the
Respondent-Contemnor was unable to comply with the
Order dated 07.11.2022 he should have moved this Court
for modification or withdrawal of the order.
28. All throughout, the Respondent-Contemnor had been in
possession of the said Property and had been utilising the
income generated from running of the said resort.
Acceptance on the part of the Respondent-Contemnor with
regard to the viability of the project is apparent from the
Order dated 07.11.2022 and his conduct. This would not
permit the Respondent-Contemnor to now turn around
and state that he is unable to make payment of not only
the monthly dues for use and occupation charges after
passing of the Order dated 07.11.2022 but also the arrears
as per which terms and conditions were fixed by this Court
in accordance with the prayer made by him. Non-
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 12 of 19
fulfilment of the mandate and direction of this Court which
were at the request of the Respondent-Contemnor himself
reflects the intent on the part of the Respondent-
Contemnor to not to comply with the order rather to violate
with the same with impunity. The conduct clearly reflects
that the intention of the Respondent-Contemnor was to
gain the benefit by running the resort in the subject
property without paying the current liability, what to say
of the arrears.
29. Moreover, the amount which has been earned from the
resort being run by the Respondent-Contemnor has not
been accounted for. It can therefore easily be said that
there has been intentional and deliberate non-compliance
on the part of the Respondent-Contemnor of the order
passed by this Court, contempt of which stands
committed, but on getting an interim order of continuing
in possession usurped the earnings instead of paying off
the dues.
30. The malafide is therefore writ large and reflect the misuse
of the process of the Court. After seeking an order from
this Court where benefit has been conferred on the basis
of the submissions of the Respondent-Contemnor, not
complying therewith amounts to contempt of Court.
31. The power and jurisdiction of this Court to initiate and
punish for its contempt has not been disputed. It is well
settled by now and it is apparent from the provisions of the
Contempt of Court Act that Civil contempt means wilful
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 13 of 19
disobedience of judgment, decree, or direction, order, writ
or other process of the Court or wilful breach of an
undertaking given to the Court.
32. Civil contempt, as is apparent from Section 2(b) of the
Contempt of Court Act 1971, means a wilful disobedience
of any judgment, direction or order passed by the Court.
All through, as has been detailed above, the intention on
the part of the Respondent-Contemnor was to use the
judicial proceedings for his advantage taking undue
benefit at the peril and cost of wrong assertions and
submissions put forth before the Court which would
amount to misleading the Court into believing the bonafide
at the hands of the Respondent-Contemnor. It would
amount to an attempt to exploit the procedural process of
Court to outreach and manoeuvre it resulting in abuse of
law and legal proceedings.
33. Any person who misuses the process of the Court with
ulterior motives cannot be said to be a person having
approached the Court with clean hands. A person who
tries to tarnish the process of litigation to the extent of
misguiding and misleading the proceedings before the
Court resulting in passing of order(s) which are to his
benefit at the cost of the loss of dignity, leading to
shrinkage of the faith of the common man in the judicial
process cannot be permitted.
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 14 of 19
1
34. This Court, in Hira Lal Dixit v. State of Uttar Pradesh
in paras 9 and 10 held as follows:
“9. It should no doubt be constantly borne in mind that the
summary jurisdiction exercised by the superior courts
in punishing contempt of their authority exists for the
purpose of preventing interference with the course of
justice and for maintaining the authority of law as is
administered in the court and thereby affording
protection to public interest in the purity of the
administration of justice. This is certainly an
extraordinary power which must be sparingly
exercised but where the public interest demands it, the
court will not shrink from exercising it and imposing
punishment even by way of imprisonment, in cases
where a mere fine may not be adequate.
10. After anxious consideration we have come to the
conclusion that in all the circumstances of this case it
is a fit case where the power of the Court should be
exercised and that it is necessary to impose the
punishment of imprisonment. People must know that
they cannot with impunity hinder or obstruct or attempt
to hinder or obstruct the due course of administration
of justice.”
35. Further, in Bank of India v. Vijay Transport And
2
Others , this Court with reference to Section 2 & 12 of
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 held that the jurisdiction so
conferred is to be exercised after having come to the
conclusion and satisfaction with regard to the commission
of contempt. This Court further went on to hold that the
said satisfaction can be derived by the Court with regard
to the commission of the contempt from the circumstances
of the case. The conduct of the party who/which is facing
the charge of contempt, not only after the issuance of the
1
(1954) 2 SCC 325
2
(2000) 8 SCC 512
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 15 of 19
notice but prior thereto, could also be taken into
consideration.
36. A party, misguiding the Court to pass an order which was
never intended to be complied with, would constitute an
act of overawing the due process of law and, thus, commit
contempt of Court. In the instant case, the opportunity
having been availed, time having been sought and granted
by the Court further reflects the intent on the part of the
Respondent-Contemnor to discard and tarnish the judicial
process by polluting it. Disobedience of the order of the
Court in such circumstances would be the only result and
thus, civil contempt.
37. The pure stream of justice cannot be allowed to be polluted
at all. Reference at this stage needs to be made to the latest
decision of this Court in Sitaram Enterprises v.
3
Prithviraj Vardichand Jain wherein in para 1 to 3 it has
been held as follows:-
“Disregarding a Court's order may seem bold, but the
shadows of its consequences are long and cold.”
1. Contempt of court is a serious legal infraction that
strikes at the very soul of justice and the sanctity of
legal proceedings. It goes beyond from mere defiance
of a Court's authority, but also denotes a profound
challenge to the principles that underpin the rule of
law. At its core, it is a profound disavowal of the
respect and adherence to the judicial process, posing a
concerning threat to integrity of judicial system. When
a party engages in contempt, it does more than simply
refusing to comply with a Court's order. By failing to
adhere to judicial directives, a contemnor not only
disrespects the specific order, but also directly
3
2024 SCC OnLine SC 2493
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 16 of 19
questions the Court's ability to uphold the rule of law.
It erodes the public confidence in the judicial system
and it's ability to deliver justice impartially and
effectively. Therefore, power to punish for Contempt of
Court's order is vital to safeguard the authority and
efficiency of the judicial system. By addressing and
penalizing contemptuous conduct, the legal system
reinforces its own legitimacy and ensures that judicial
orders and proceedings are taken seriously. This
deterrent effect helps to maintain the rule of law and
reinforces public's faith in the judicial process,
ensuring that Courts can function effectively without
undue interference or disrespect.
2. Contempt powers are integral to maintaining the
sanctity of judicial proceedings. The ability to address
contempt ensures that the authority of the court is
respected and that the administration of justice is not
hampered by willful disobedience. In the said context,
the power of this Court to punish for contempt is a
cornerstone of its authority, integral to the
administration of justice and the maintenance of its
own dignity. Enshrined in Article 129 of the
Constitution of India, this power is essential for
upholding the rule of law and ensuring due compliance
by addressing actions that undermine its authority,
obstruct its proceedings, or diminish the public trust
and confidence in the judicial system.
3. The Courts ordinarily take lenient approach in a case
of some delay in compliance of the orders, unless the
same is deliberate and willful, on confronting the
conduct of the contemnor that strikes the very heart of
judicial authority. Undoubtedly, this appalling breach
of legal decorum has in its face challenged the sanctity
of the orders passed by this Court and hence we are
constrained to examine Contemnor/tenant's willful
and deliberate act of non-compliance of the order and
also the undertaking furnished by him as directed.”
38. The above principles and the observations, as made by this
Court, would fully apply to the case at hand where, from
the very beginning till the very end the Respondent-
Contemnor has been taking the Court for a ride. The
misuse of the process of Court with an intent to tarnish
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 17 of 19
the image of judiciary, threatening the integrity, and the
efficiency of the judicial system cannot be allowed to be
overlooked and ignored in the garb of non-fulfilment of the
directions because of now said to be faced financial
constraints.
39. The Respondent-Contemnor cannot be allowed to go scot
free after having taken this Court at a stage where his
conduct leaves this Court with no option but to take strict
action and to punish him for the contempt committed by
him, i.e., non-compliance of the directions issued by this
Court vide Order dated 07.11.2022.
40. This case, in our opinion, would not be one where mere
imposition of fine would suffice. In the given facts and
circumstances of the present case, we are convinced that
the Respondent-Contemnor is liable to be punished for the
contumacious conduct.
41. We, in the above facts and circumstances, hold Shaji
Augustine-Respondent, guilty of Civil Contempt and
impose punishment of Simple Imprisonment for three
months along with fine of INR 20,000/- to be deposited in
two weeks, and in case of default, further Simple
Imprisonment for one month.
42. Giving one more opportunity to the Respondent-
Contemnor to purge the contempt, 30 days time is granted
to him to comply with the Order dated 07.11.2022 and
submit compliance report to the Registrar Judicial of this
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 18 of 19
Court a week thereafter. The punishment, as aforesaid,
would come into effect in case the directions as contained
in the Order dated 07.11.2022 are not complied with,
within 30 days of the pronouncement of this judgment.
The contempt proceedings are disposed of.
43. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
……...……….……………………..J.
[ ABHAY S. OKA ]
.……..………..……………………..J.
[ AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ]
NEW DELHI;
APRIL 24, 2025
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 19 of 19
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
INHERENT JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 712 OF 2023
IN
SLP (CIVIL) NO. 17433 OF 2021
M/S CHITHRA WOODS MANORS
WELFARE ASSOCIATION PETITIONER (S)
VERSUS
SHAJI AUGUSTINE ALLEGED CONTEMNOR/RESPONDENT
J U D G M E N T
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J .
1. The instant Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 712 of 2023
(hereinafter referred to as “instant Petition”) in SLP (C) No.
17433 of 2021 (hereinafter referred to as “main Petition”)
was filed during its pendency by M/s Chithra Woods
Manors Welfare Association, being the Respondent No. 01
therein (hereinafter referred to as “Petitioner Association”),
alleging non-payment of arrears of use and occupation
charges for period between 20.09.2021 and 31.11.2022 in
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
DEEPAK SINGH
Date: 2025.04.25
10:04:43 IST
Reason:
six monthly instalments beginning 31.12.2022, as
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 1 of 19
directed by this Court vide Order dated 07.11.2022 in the
main Petition.
2. This petition was then tagged along with the main Petition
vide Order dated 24.02.2023 and eventually, owing to the
said non-payment of arrears, the main Petition was
disposed of as this Court observed to not entertain the
prayer of Mr Shaji Augustine, the Petitioner therein
(hereinafter referred to as “Respondent-Contemnor”) but
the proceedings in instant Petition sustained.
3. Facts forming the backdrop of the instant Petition are that
the Petitioner Association is owner of the decree scheduled
building, consisting of 96 furnished studio apartments, at
Munnar, Kerala (hereinafter referred to as the “said
Property”). An agreement was entered between the
Petitioner Association and Respondent-Contemnor on
26.01.2014, permitting the latter to occupy and use the
said Property for a period of 10 years as against payment
of licence fees of INR 12 Lakhs per month (hereinafter
referred to as the “said Agreement).
4. Within a short period of entering into the said Agreement,
Respondent-Contemnor defaulted in payment of the
license fees. On persistent default, Petitioner Association
was constrained to institute OS No.30 of 2015 before the
Sub Court at Thodupuzha, Kerala for realization of the
arrears and other reliefs. As there was an arbitration
clause in the said Agreement and on consent of the parties
herein, the dispute was referred to a Sole Arbitrator.
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 2 of 19
5. Before the Sole Arbitrator, the Petitioner Association
moved I.A. No. 01 of 2016 under Section 17 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred
to as “A&C Act”), seeking direction to the Respondent-
Contemnor to deposit INR 1,65,73,459/- (Rupees One
crore Sixty-Five Lakhs Seventy-Three Thousand Four
Hundred Fifty-Nine only) during pendency of the
proceedings. The same was partially allowed vide Order
dated 23.06.2016 with direction to deposit INR
1,36,49,439/- (Rupees One crore Thirty-Six Lakhs Forty-
Nine Thousand Four Hundred Thirty-Nine only) and per
undertaking of the Respondent-Contemnor, payment of
INR 12 lakhs per mensem for month of June 2016
th
onwards, on or before the 10 of the succeeding month,
pending disposal of the proceedings.
6. Both Respondent-Contemnor and Petitioner Association
moved in appeal under Section 37 of the A&C Act before
the District Court at Ernakulam, Kerala. A Common Order
dated 21.01.2017 was passed, staying the proceedings
before the Sole Arbitrator with reiteration of direction to
Respondent-Contemnor to pay arrears at the rate of INR
12 Lakhs per month with effect from 08.09.2016 with a
further order to continue to pay INR 12 Lakhs per month
towards monthly license fee.
7. This common order was challenged by the Respondent-
Contemnor before the High Court of Kerala in O.P. (C) No
552 of 2017. The matter was referred for mediation at the
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 3 of 19
request of the parties. The said mediation proceedings,
lead to a Compromise dated 03.04.2017 (hereinafter
referred to as the “Settlement Agreement”), Petitioner
Association agreed to reduce the monthly license fees to
INR 8 Lakhs per month. Arrears, as claimed before the Sole
Arbitrator, were also reduced from INR 1,65,73,439/- to
INR 75 Lakhs. Moreover, it was specifically recorded that
the settlement entered between the parties would form
part of the judgment. There was a specific clause that in
case of default by any of the parties to any of the terms of
the agreement the other would be entitled to proceed
against the other party. The parties resolved their
disputes, and the terms of settlement arrived at between
them were accepted by the High Court of Kerala and were
incorporated in the Order dated 11.04.2017.
8. On default on the part of the Respondent-Contemnor in
making payment through a promissory note, as per the
Settlement Agreement, Petitioner Association preferred
Execution Petition No. 58 of 2020 on 11.03.2020, no
money was paid by the Respondent-Contemnor with effect
from the month of July 2018. The Respondent-Contemnor
was unsuccessful before the District Court in EA No. 14 of
2021 in its challenge to the maintainability of the
execution petition. The Execution Court passed an Order
dated 23.03.2021, giving an instalment facility to the
Respondent-Contemnor for payments of its arrears, with
the first being due on 01.06.2021 and the last being
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 4 of 19
01.09.2021. Furthermore, the amount of arrears being
undisputed, and nothing having been paid, the Execution
Court ordered delivery of the said Property. The
Respondent-Contemnor challenged the order of the
Execution Court before the High Court of Kerala, which
was dismissed vide Judgment dated 20.09.2021.
9. It is at this stage that the respondent preferred the main
Petition before this Court challenging the Judgment dated
20.09.2021. Notice was issued vide Order dated
12.11.2021 and subsequently, status quo was ordered
vide Order dated 04.02.2022 vis-à-vis the said Property.
The matter ultimately came for consideration on
07.11.2022 when following Order was passed:-
“List on a non-miscellaneous day in the month of
March, 2023.
In the meanwhile, as an interim measure, we are
inclined to direct that the petitioner will pay Rs. 12
lakhs per month to the respondent as use and
occupation charges w.e.f. 20.09.2021 (the date of the
impugned judgment). As prayed on behalf of the
petitioner, the arrears @ Rs. 12 lakhs per month from
20.09.2021 till 31.11.2022, would be paid in six
monthly instalments beginning 31.12.2022. The
petitioner would also continue to make payment of Rs.
th
12 lakhs per month in the future by the 10 day of each
succeeding calendar month.
The payment would be subject to the outcome of the
present Special Leave Petition.”
10. A perusal of the above would show that a direction was
issued to the Respondent-Contemnor to pay arrears for the
period specified therein in six monthly instalments
beginning from 31.12.2022, totalling to INR 172 Lakhs, at
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 5 of 19
the rate of INR 12 Lakhs per month, and being INR 28.60
Lakhs per instalment.
11. Pursuant to the Order dated 07.11.2022, the Respondent-
Contemnor sent an e-mail to the Petitioner Association
containing a letter dated 17.11.2022 seeking the
concerned account details of the Petitioner Association for
the Respondent-Contemnor to transfer the arrears
enabling him to affect compliance with Order dated
07.11.2022 passed by this Court. The said details were
provided by the Petitioner Association on 14.12.2022 in
response to the aforesaid e-mail. Despite getting the
required information, no amount was paid to the Petitioner
Association and yet, the Respondent-Contemnor
continued to enjoy and occupy the said Property. It is
apparent that the intention on the part of the Respondent-
Contemnor was not to do away with the possession of the
said Property and to hold on to it owing to his act of moving
the main Petition for challenging the handing over of the
possession of the said Property.
12. Petitioner Association asserts that deliberate action on
behalf of the respondent in not complying with the
direction issued by this Court on 17.11.2022 with
continuous default on his part amounts to civil contempt
which is deliberate and intentional disobedience of the
order of this Court.
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 6 of 19
13. Subsequently, on 01.12.2023, when both the main
Petition and instant Petition were taken up for hearing
following order was passed:-
“The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
states that the petitioner has already vacated the
premises subject matter of this Special Leave Petition.
th
We find that the order dated 7 November, 2022
directing the petitioner to deposit money has not been
complied with. The petitioner has expressed inability to
pay the money. The jurisdiction of this Court under
Article 136 of the Constitution of India is always
discretionary.
Considering the conduct of the petitioner of not paying
th
a single farthing after 7 November, 2022, we decline
to entertain this Special Leave Petition and the same is
accordingly dismissed.
However, the question of law is kept open to be
considered in an appropriate case.
Pending application also stand disposed of.
CONMT. PET. (C) No. 712/2023 in SLP(C) No.
17433/2021.
nd
List on 22 January, 2024.”
14. With the main Petition having been dismissed, the instant
Petition continued to survive and was taken up for hearing
on various dates. Respondent-Contemnor was called upon
by this Court on 15.03.2024 to file an affidavit giving
details of all his movable and immovable assets as also
that of his immediate family members along with the
necessary documents. This was in light of the statement of
the counsel of the Respondent-Contemnor that he is not
in a position to deposit any amount.
15. After filing of the affidavit by the Respondent-Contemnor
and on perusal thereof this Court on 12.09.2024 found the
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 7 of 19
Respondent-Contemnor, who was appearing through
video conferencing, of having committed wilful breach of
the directions contained in the Order dated 07.11.2022.
The Respondent-Contemnor was ordered to be heard on
the said charge as no amount had been paid by him and
was directed to be personally present in Court. The
Respondent-Contemnor subsequently appeared and an
opportunity was given to comply with the Order while
being heard on charge. Owing to his non-intention to
comply, the case was kept reserved for orders.
16. Stand of the Respondent-Contemnor in the affidavit which
has been filed is that the compliance of the Order dated
07.11.2022 passed by this Court is beyond his financial
and physical capabilities. It is thus, neither deliberate nor
an intentional non-compliance of the order and is only on
account of his penury. He has, thus, prayed for dropping
of the current contempt proceedings.
17. Counsel for the Petitioner Association, on the other hand,
has asserted that the conduct of the Respondent-
Contemnor from the very beginning was clearly indicative
of an attempt on the part of the Respondent-Contemnor to
hold on to the possession of the said Property. Despite the
Settlement Agreement, which has attained finality by
virtue of not being challenged, to retain the possession of
the said Property, Respondent-Contemnor has constantly
litigated across forums. Such an act on part of the
Respondent-Contemnor clearly showed that without
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 8 of 19
making payment of the amount due to the petitioners, he
was reaping the fruits of the scheduled property in
violation of the terms of settlement.
18. Had it not been a viable preposition, the possession could
have been easily handed over by the Respondent-
Contemnor. Having taken benefit of the said Property,
Respondent-Contemnor cannot be now permitted to take
the plea of penury. Rather, it is an intentional non-
compliance of the directions issued by this Court even
after partial monetary benefit had been conferred upon
him vide Order dated 07.11.2022. Even till date no
payment whatsoever has been made which clearly reflects
the malafide of the Respondent-Contemnor. A reference is
also made to the Order dated 04.02.2022 when status quo
was ordered by this Court in relation to the property in
question to be maintained. Prayer has thus been made for
punishing the Respondent-Contemnor for having
committed contempt of this Court’s Order dated
07.11.2022.
19. Having considered the submissions made by the counsels
for the parties, we are of the considered view that the
Respondent-Contemnor has deliberately and with
malafide intention, not only mislead and misused the
process of the courts but has also intentionally violated
the order passed by this Court on 07.11.2022 by not
making the payment as directed therein.
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 9 of 19
20. At the prospect of reiteration of the factual matrix, the
conduct of the Respondent-Contemnor since the
Settlement Agreement reflects his patent intent to retain
the said Property and this indicates that the business
proposition was not only a viable one but was yielding
profits. No person with a modest business acumen would
continue with a loss-causing endeavour. Respondent-
Contemnor has nowhere reflected the receipts from the
business being undertaken in the said Property.
21. Subsequently, he even sought time from the Execution
Court, but failed to comply, prompting an order for delivery
of possession of the said Property. This, he then challenged
through Revision Petition before the High Court of Kerala
and ultimately before this Court through the main
Petition.
22. It was on his insistence that this Court ordered status quo
vide Order dated 04.02.2022. However, he neither paid the
dues nor complied with the subsequent Order dated
07.11.2022 mandating payment of INR 12 lakhs per
month from 20.09.2021 and arrears in instalments.
23. The e-mail dated 17.11.2022, which was addressed to the
Petitioner Association by the Respondent-Contemnor,
seeking account details for the concerned amount to be
transferred, was responded accordingly by the Petitioner
Association vide e-mail dated 26.11.2022. Despite all this,
not even a rupee was credited to the account of the
Petitioner Association.
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 10 of 19
24. Faced with this situation, Petitioner Association had no
option but to file the instant Petition before this Court
leading to issuance of notice on 24.02.2023 along with an
opportunity to the Respondent-Contemnor to remedy the
default. After various dates, the matter ultimately came for
hearing on 01.12.2023, when, owing to non-compliance of
Order dated 07.11.2022 for depositing money, the main
Petition was dismissed and the instant Petition survived.
25. It is only on 15.03.2024 that for the first time counsel for
the Respondent-Contemnor stated that he was not in a
position to deposit any amount, whereupon this Court
called for details of his immovable and movable assets and
that of his immediate family members, along with
necessary documents. Physical presence of the
Respondent-Contemnor was also ordered in Court on the
next date of hearing.
26. Respondent-Contemnor appeared through video
conference in Court on 12.07.2024 when the affidavit
which was filed by the respondent-contemnor was
considered. On perusal thereof, Court found the
Respondent-Contemnor having committed a wilful breach
of the directions contained in the order dated 07.11.2022.
He was, therefore, called upon to face the said charge and
with an intention to give him an opportunity of being
heard. The matter was listed for hearing with a direction
to the contemnor to personally remain present before the
Court. The contemnor was heard in person in Court and
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 11 of 19
was again given an opportunity to comply with the order
of which he had committed contempt i.e. non-payment of
the amount and the arrears. The contemnor did not
express any remorse nor showed any intention to comply
with the order passed by this Court rather asserted that
he was not in a position to make any payment. It is in these
circumstances that the matter is being considered.
27. The e-mail dated 17.11.2022 intrinsically reflects financial
capability and liquidity at hands of the Respondent-
Contemnor. Had the Respondent-Contemnor been in dire
financial difficulty, the said communication would not
have come to the fore. Besides, had it been that the
Respondent-Contemnor was unable to comply with the
Order dated 07.11.2022 he should have moved this Court
for modification or withdrawal of the order.
28. All throughout, the Respondent-Contemnor had been in
possession of the said Property and had been utilising the
income generated from running of the said resort.
Acceptance on the part of the Respondent-Contemnor with
regard to the viability of the project is apparent from the
Order dated 07.11.2022 and his conduct. This would not
permit the Respondent-Contemnor to now turn around
and state that he is unable to make payment of not only
the monthly dues for use and occupation charges after
passing of the Order dated 07.11.2022 but also the arrears
as per which terms and conditions were fixed by this Court
in accordance with the prayer made by him. Non-
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 12 of 19
fulfilment of the mandate and direction of this Court which
were at the request of the Respondent-Contemnor himself
reflects the intent on the part of the Respondent-
Contemnor to not to comply with the order rather to violate
with the same with impunity. The conduct clearly reflects
that the intention of the Respondent-Contemnor was to
gain the benefit by running the resort in the subject
property without paying the current liability, what to say
of the arrears.
29. Moreover, the amount which has been earned from the
resort being run by the Respondent-Contemnor has not
been accounted for. It can therefore easily be said that
there has been intentional and deliberate non-compliance
on the part of the Respondent-Contemnor of the order
passed by this Court, contempt of which stands
committed, but on getting an interim order of continuing
in possession usurped the earnings instead of paying off
the dues.
30. The malafide is therefore writ large and reflect the misuse
of the process of the Court. After seeking an order from
this Court where benefit has been conferred on the basis
of the submissions of the Respondent-Contemnor, not
complying therewith amounts to contempt of Court.
31. The power and jurisdiction of this Court to initiate and
punish for its contempt has not been disputed. It is well
settled by now and it is apparent from the provisions of the
Contempt of Court Act that Civil contempt means wilful
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 13 of 19
disobedience of judgment, decree, or direction, order, writ
or other process of the Court or wilful breach of an
undertaking given to the Court.
32. Civil contempt, as is apparent from Section 2(b) of the
Contempt of Court Act 1971, means a wilful disobedience
of any judgment, direction or order passed by the Court.
All through, as has been detailed above, the intention on
the part of the Respondent-Contemnor was to use the
judicial proceedings for his advantage taking undue
benefit at the peril and cost of wrong assertions and
submissions put forth before the Court which would
amount to misleading the Court into believing the bonafide
at the hands of the Respondent-Contemnor. It would
amount to an attempt to exploit the procedural process of
Court to outreach and manoeuvre it resulting in abuse of
law and legal proceedings.
33. Any person who misuses the process of the Court with
ulterior motives cannot be said to be a person having
approached the Court with clean hands. A person who
tries to tarnish the process of litigation to the extent of
misguiding and misleading the proceedings before the
Court resulting in passing of order(s) which are to his
benefit at the cost of the loss of dignity, leading to
shrinkage of the faith of the common man in the judicial
process cannot be permitted.
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 14 of 19
1
34. This Court, in Hira Lal Dixit v. State of Uttar Pradesh
in paras 9 and 10 held as follows:
“9. It should no doubt be constantly borne in mind that the
summary jurisdiction exercised by the superior courts
in punishing contempt of their authority exists for the
purpose of preventing interference with the course of
justice and for maintaining the authority of law as is
administered in the court and thereby affording
protection to public interest in the purity of the
administration of justice. This is certainly an
extraordinary power which must be sparingly
exercised but where the public interest demands it, the
court will not shrink from exercising it and imposing
punishment even by way of imprisonment, in cases
where a mere fine may not be adequate.
10. After anxious consideration we have come to the
conclusion that in all the circumstances of this case it
is a fit case where the power of the Court should be
exercised and that it is necessary to impose the
punishment of imprisonment. People must know that
they cannot with impunity hinder or obstruct or attempt
to hinder or obstruct the due course of administration
of justice.”
35. Further, in Bank of India v. Vijay Transport And
2
Others , this Court with reference to Section 2 & 12 of
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 held that the jurisdiction so
conferred is to be exercised after having come to the
conclusion and satisfaction with regard to the commission
of contempt. This Court further went on to hold that the
said satisfaction can be derived by the Court with regard
to the commission of the contempt from the circumstances
of the case. The conduct of the party who/which is facing
the charge of contempt, not only after the issuance of the
1
(1954) 2 SCC 325
2
(2000) 8 SCC 512
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 15 of 19
notice but prior thereto, could also be taken into
consideration.
36. A party, misguiding the Court to pass an order which was
never intended to be complied with, would constitute an
act of overawing the due process of law and, thus, commit
contempt of Court. In the instant case, the opportunity
having been availed, time having been sought and granted
by the Court further reflects the intent on the part of the
Respondent-Contemnor to discard and tarnish the judicial
process by polluting it. Disobedience of the order of the
Court in such circumstances would be the only result and
thus, civil contempt.
37. The pure stream of justice cannot be allowed to be polluted
at all. Reference at this stage needs to be made to the latest
decision of this Court in Sitaram Enterprises v.
3
Prithviraj Vardichand Jain wherein in para 1 to 3 it has
been held as follows:-
“Disregarding a Court's order may seem bold, but the
shadows of its consequences are long and cold.”
1. Contempt of court is a serious legal infraction that
strikes at the very soul of justice and the sanctity of
legal proceedings. It goes beyond from mere defiance
of a Court's authority, but also denotes a profound
challenge to the principles that underpin the rule of
law. At its core, it is a profound disavowal of the
respect and adherence to the judicial process, posing a
concerning threat to integrity of judicial system. When
a party engages in contempt, it does more than simply
refusing to comply with a Court's order. By failing to
adhere to judicial directives, a contemnor not only
disrespects the specific order, but also directly
3
2024 SCC OnLine SC 2493
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 16 of 19
questions the Court's ability to uphold the rule of law.
It erodes the public confidence in the judicial system
and it's ability to deliver justice impartially and
effectively. Therefore, power to punish for Contempt of
Court's order is vital to safeguard the authority and
efficiency of the judicial system. By addressing and
penalizing contemptuous conduct, the legal system
reinforces its own legitimacy and ensures that judicial
orders and proceedings are taken seriously. This
deterrent effect helps to maintain the rule of law and
reinforces public's faith in the judicial process,
ensuring that Courts can function effectively without
undue interference or disrespect.
2. Contempt powers are integral to maintaining the
sanctity of judicial proceedings. The ability to address
contempt ensures that the authority of the court is
respected and that the administration of justice is not
hampered by willful disobedience. In the said context,
the power of this Court to punish for contempt is a
cornerstone of its authority, integral to the
administration of justice and the maintenance of its
own dignity. Enshrined in Article 129 of the
Constitution of India, this power is essential for
upholding the rule of law and ensuring due compliance
by addressing actions that undermine its authority,
obstruct its proceedings, or diminish the public trust
and confidence in the judicial system.
3. The Courts ordinarily take lenient approach in a case
of some delay in compliance of the orders, unless the
same is deliberate and willful, on confronting the
conduct of the contemnor that strikes the very heart of
judicial authority. Undoubtedly, this appalling breach
of legal decorum has in its face challenged the sanctity
of the orders passed by this Court and hence we are
constrained to examine Contemnor/tenant's willful
and deliberate act of non-compliance of the order and
also the undertaking furnished by him as directed.”
38. The above principles and the observations, as made by this
Court, would fully apply to the case at hand where, from
the very beginning till the very end the Respondent-
Contemnor has been taking the Court for a ride. The
misuse of the process of Court with an intent to tarnish
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 17 of 19
the image of judiciary, threatening the integrity, and the
efficiency of the judicial system cannot be allowed to be
overlooked and ignored in the garb of non-fulfilment of the
directions because of now said to be faced financial
constraints.
39. The Respondent-Contemnor cannot be allowed to go scot
free after having taken this Court at a stage where his
conduct leaves this Court with no option but to take strict
action and to punish him for the contempt committed by
him, i.e., non-compliance of the directions issued by this
Court vide Order dated 07.11.2022.
40. This case, in our opinion, would not be one where mere
imposition of fine would suffice. In the given facts and
circumstances of the present case, we are convinced that
the Respondent-Contemnor is liable to be punished for the
contumacious conduct.
41. We, in the above facts and circumstances, hold Shaji
Augustine-Respondent, guilty of Civil Contempt and
impose punishment of Simple Imprisonment for three
months along with fine of INR 20,000/- to be deposited in
two weeks, and in case of default, further Simple
Imprisonment for one month.
42. Giving one more opportunity to the Respondent-
Contemnor to purge the contempt, 30 days time is granted
to him to comply with the Order dated 07.11.2022 and
submit compliance report to the Registrar Judicial of this
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 18 of 19
Court a week thereafter. The punishment, as aforesaid,
would come into effect in case the directions as contained
in the Order dated 07.11.2022 are not complied with,
within 30 days of the pronouncement of this judgment.
The contempt proceedings are disposed of.
43. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
……...……….……………………..J.
[ ABHAY S. OKA ]
.……..………..……………………..J.
[ AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ]
NEW DELHI;
APRIL 24, 2025
Contempt Petition (C) No. 712 of 2023 Page 19 of 19