Page 1

1

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 831 OF 2017

[ @ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION NO. 1739 OF 2017 ] AGYAPAUL SINGH                                Appellant(s)

                               VERSUS STATE BANK OF INDIA (SAMB)                    Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T KURIAN, J. 1. Leave granted.

2. In the peculiar facts of this case, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondent.

3. The appellant is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 23.12.2016 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in COCP No. 2084 of 2016.  According to the  High  Court,  the  appellant  is  to  be  proceeded against  for  violating  the  order  dated  01.06.2016 passed by the High Court.  The order dated 01.06.2016 reads as follows :-

“The  petition  is  allowed  to  be withdrawn  with  liberty  to  avail  the alternate  remedy  under  the Securitization  and  Reconstruction  of Financial  Assets  and  Enforcement  of Security  Interest  Act,  2002  (in  short SARFAESI Act).

Page 2

2

2. The only concession that we are inclined to grant to the petitioners an opportunity to make an application for interim  reliefs  before  the  Debts Recovery  Tribunal.   For  this  purpose alone we direct the bank not to encash the  cheque  dated  25.06.2016  till 25.07.2016 and further direct that the District  Magistrate,  Ludhiana  shall adjourn the hearing of the application under  Section  14  of  the  SARFAESI  Act till 31.07.2016.  This is in view of the express undertaking given to the Court that the cheque will be honoured upon presentation on or after 25.07.2016.”

4.  It is not in dispute that a cheque for an amount of  Rs.  7.5  crores  (Rupees  Seven  Crores  and  Fifty Lakhs) presented to the bank was dishonoured.  It is the case of the appellant that only on this fact, he is not liable to be proceeded with in proceedings for Contempt of Court Act.  If only there is a willful disobedience, the appellant may be punished.

5. Whether  there  is  a  willful  or  deliberate disobedience  of  the  order  passed  by  the  Court  is something  to  be  seen  from  the  reply  filed  by  the appellant  to  the  show  cause  notice.   Even  before issuing show cause, we find that the High Court has entered a satisfaction that  “.....this court is not

Page 3

3

inclined to accept the prayer (to file reply) as this court finds prima facie that contempt of court has

been committed.”

6. In  that view  of the  matter, we  set aside  the impugned order passed by the High Court.  The High Court shall grant an opportunity to the appellant to file  his  reply  and  on  the  reply  being  filed,  the appellant may be heard and only thereafter, the High Court may form an opinion as to whether the court should proceed against the appellant for Contempt of Court.

7. In the light of what we have stated above, we request  the  High  Court  not  to  insist  upon  the personal  presence  of  the  appellant  till  the  Court passes appropriate orders in the light of the reply furnished by the appellant.

8. In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of. No costs.   

.......................J.               [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ A. M. KHANWILKAR ]  

New Delhi; January 23, 2017.