Page 1

NON-REPORTABLE   

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.1643 OF 2012 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 4522 of 2016

SATYENDRA SINGH                      APPELLANT                                 VERSUS

SAROJ RANI AND ORS.     RESPONDENTS             

J U D G M E N T KURIAN, J.                        

1.  Heard learned counsel for Respondent No.1  The others  are proforma respondents and it is not necessary to issue  notice to them. 2.  Leave granted. 3.  The only grievance now before us is that even during  the pendency of review application filed by the appellant  before the High Court, the High Court is proceeding  with  contempt proceedings. 4. Having Heard the learned counsel for the respondents  also, we feel that in the interest of justice, the High  Court should dispose of the review application No. 82/2009  filed in Writ Petition No. 2889 (M/B) of 1992 within a  period of one month from today.  We also request the High  Court to defer contempt proceedings against the appellant  till the review application is disposed of.

Page 2

-2-

5. We make it clear that neither the pendency of the  review application nor that of the contempt proceedings and  this order shall stand in the way of the parties attempting  for a settlement of the disputes between them.  6. We  make  it  clear  that  we  have  not  expressed  any  opinion on the merits of the case and it will be open to  the parties to raise all available contentions before the  High Court. 7. The appeal is disposed of with no order as to costs.

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

 ....................J.       [ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN]

NEW DELHI; FEBRUARY 22, 2016