Gauhati High Court
COP(C)/34/2025 of M/S H.T. CONSTRUCTION Vs SHRI SENTIYANGER IMCHEN AND 3 ORS on 8 June 2026
GAHC020007312025 2026:GAU-NL:346 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : COP(C)/34/2025 M/S H.T. CONSTRUCTION REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, MR. H. THONG, SON OF LATE GWANYU THONG, RESIDENT OF H.NO. 27 B, SEMA KHEL, NOTUN
GAHC020007312025
2026:GAU-NL:346
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KOHIMA BENCH
Case No. : COP(C)/34/2025
M/S H.T. CONSTRUCTION
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, MR. H. THONG, SON OF LATE
GWANYU THONG, RESIDENT OF H.NO. 27 B, SEMA KHEL, NOTUN
BOSTI, DIMAPUR, NAGALAND
VERSUS
SHRI SENTIYANGER IMCHEN AND 3 ORS
CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF NAGALAND, NAGALAND KOHIMA
2:SHRI ABHIJIT SINHA
HOME COMMISSIONER
GOVT. OF NAGALAND
NAGALAND KOHIMA
3:SHRI RUPIN SHARMA
DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
PHQ
NAGALAND KOHIMA
4:ER. K. IMNAJUNGBA JAMIR
CHIEF ENGINEER
POLICE ENGINEERING PROJECT
PHQ
NAGALAND KOHIM
Advocate for the Petitioner : N. MOZHUI, N. RUPREO
Advocate for the Respondent : ,
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 09-06-2026 Heard Mr. N. Mozhui, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. N. Angami, learned Senior Government Advocate for the respondent no. 1 and Ms. Livika, learned Government Advocate for the respondent nos. 2 and 3.
2. The learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 and 3 has drawn by attention to the previous order dated 25.05.2026 in this contempt petition, where the matter in a nutshell pertains to payment of bills. The personal appearance of the respondent nos. 3 and 4 was also directed.
3. However, Mr. N. Mozhui, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the bills - the non payment of which led to the proceeding, and the subsequent contempt petition - have been cleared in the meantime and that the petitioner’s side has no objection to closing of the contempt proceeding.
4. I have given my consideration to the matter.
5. It is well settled that contempt proceeding is not a mode of execution of an order passed by the court. The issue of contempt is primarily between the alleged contemnor and the Court. Nevertheless, in view of the compliance of the order, and the petitioner left with no grievance at the moment as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner - it would be in the interest of justice to close the contempt proceeding.
6. Accordingly, in the given facts and circumstances, allowing the prayer, the instant proceeding stands closed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant