Uttarakhand High Court

CLCON/204/2025 of SATISH KUMAR AND ANR Vs RAJNISH KUMAR on 21 August 2025

Cites 0, Cited by 0

Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS D-56 CLCON No. 204 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. Anshu Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners, through video conferencing. Mr. Arvind

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS D-56

CLCON No. 204 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Mr. Anshu Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners, through video conferencing. Mr. Arvind Vashistha, Senior Advocate assisted by Dr. Neha Gupta, Advocate for the respondent. By means of the instant contempt petition, the petitioner seeks action against the respondent under Order 39 Rule 2 A of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (“CPC”). Heard and perused the file. In Second Appeal No. 5 of 2016, Satish Kumar and another v. Rajnish Kumar and others, and other connected matter, this Court on 06.01.2016 had directed the parties to maintain status quo. The petitioners claim that status quo order has been defied; therefore, application has been filed under Section 39 Rule 2A of CPC. Learned Senior Counsel for the respondents, at the very outset, submits that this is an application under Order 39 Rule 2A CPC, which can be filed as a miscellaneous application in the civil appeal only; for that purpose, contempt petition may not be entertained. At it, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the contempt petition. A contempt petition once filed, may not be withdraw, because it is a matter between the Court and the contemnor. But, in the instant matter, as such any contempt of Court has not been reported.

What is reported is defiance of the Court’s order passed in the second appeal and action is sought under Order 39 Rule 2A CPC, which definitely cannot be entertained in contempt jurisdiction. Accordingly, the contempt petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

(Ravindra Maithani J.)

21.08.2025 Avneet/

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead