Delhi High Court: In a contempt petition filed by the petitioner due to the contemnor, Mr. Arvind Malik’s (respondent) willful non-compliance with the order dated 15-02-2021 passed by a coordinate bench of this Court with respect to the directions to the respondent to pay use and occupation charges for the subject property, Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J., held that the Respondent who has abused the legal process and shown disregard for the orders of the Court, this Court sentences respondent, contemnor, Mr. Arvind Malik to undergo six (06) months simple imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default on the payment of fine, he shall further undergo fifteen (15) days simple imprisonment.
The Petitioners are the owners, and the Respondent is the erstwhile occupier who was using the subject property for commercial purposes by letting it out as paying guest accommodation. The Respondent, contemnor is an advocate enrolled under the Bar Council of Delhi, who in contravention of the Advocates Act, 1961 and the Bar Council of India Rules, 1961 thereunder has been carrying on the business of paying guest accommodation from the subject property. The contempt petition was filed on 25-02-2021 as the respondent failed to make payment of the use and occupation charges, while continuing to occupy the subject property.
This Court gave multiple opportunities to the respondent to comply with the order dated 15-02-2021, however, the respondent failed to comply with the order and in fact aggravated the contempt and the possession of the subject property was handed over by the respondent on 15-12-2021 during the pendency of these proceedings.
The Court noted that a law-abiding citizen would have vacated the premises immediately after 01-10-2020, if he did not have the wherewithal to pay the use and occupation charges. However, it is a matter of record that the Respondent continued to use and occupy the subject property. Thus, the plea of financial hardship will not be admissible because he vacated the subject property belatedly on 15-12-2021 despite being aware that the Court has fixed the use and occupation charges of Rs. 1,60,000.
The Court remarked that the respondent has already been held guilty of contempt and the Court is not satisfied with the unconditional apology tendered by the respondent and the same stands rejected. the Respondent using his knowledge of law intended to abuse the procedural safeguards by taking resort to legal process to injunct the landlord from interfering in his enjoyment of the subject property and sought to use the process to deny payment of admitted rent of Rs. 1,60,000 per month to the landlord.
Thus, the Court held that it is a fit case where any leniency shown by the Court will be misunderstood as weakness and sentenced the contemnor to undergo six (06) months simple imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default on payment of fine, he shall further undergo fifteen (15) days simple imprisonment.
The Court directed the Registrar General of the Court to take necessary steps to have the convicted contemnor taken into custody and cause him to send to Central Jail, Tihar, under appropriate warrant of commitment for undergoing the sentence awarded.
The Court further sent the order to the Bar Council of Delhi along with the statement of respondent for taking necessary action as may be deemed appropriate.
[Parnita Kapoor v Arvind Malik, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 1553, decided on 16-03-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Rajan Tyagi, Advocate for the Petitioner;
Mr. Rajan Tyagi, Advocate for the Respondent.
