w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Shobha Singh v/s B.K. Srivastava

    Contempt No. 12 of 2014

    Decided On, 17 February 2014

    At, High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITU RAJ AWASTHI

    For the Appellant: Panna Lal Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondent: Waquar Hashim, Advocate.



Judgment Text

Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.

1. Heard.

2. This contempt petition arises out of the judgment and order dated 7.5.2013 passed in F.A.F.O. N

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

o.141 of 2006; Smt. Shobha Singh and others v. Mandal Prabandhak, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. & others.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the opposite parties have committed contempt of Court's order as they failed to comply the judgment passed by the first appellate court.

4. Mr. Waquar Hashim, learned counsel appearing for respondent has raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability of contempt petition on the ground that the petitioner has a remedy of filing execution case under Section 174 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in case the judgment passed by the appellate court was not complied.

5. In support of his submissions Mr.Waquar Hashim has placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of R.N. Dey and others v. Bhagyabati Pramanik and others; (2000) 4 Supreme Court Cases 400 wherein it has been held that normally contempt proceedings cannot be used for execution of the decree or implementation of an order for which alternative remedy in law is provided for.

6. I am satisfied that the petitioner has remedy by filing execution case under Section 174 of Motor Vehicles Act, as such the contempt petition would not be maintainable.

7. It is accordingly dismissed.

8. Notice, if any, issued earlier stands discharged with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum.
O R