- (1.) This contempt petition filed on behalf of the petitioner, arises out of breach of undertaking dated 4-4-1995 furnished by the respondent-contemnor before this Court in Civil Review Petition No. 36 of 1995 arising out of S.. B. Civil First Appeal No. 57 of 1995 decided on 23-3-1995. The petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of arrears of rent and eviction against the contemnor Sajjan Kumar Jain and M/s. Goyanka Exhibitors Pvt. Ltd. in the Court of District Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur. The said suit was decreed on 13-1-1995 in accordance with law.
(2.) It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that a 'suit was filed in respect of a residential premises No. D-23, Sarswati Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur against the defendant-contemnor for his eviction on the ground that the suit premises were taken on rent @ Rs. 7000/- p.m. for the purpose of running guest house and office. Eviction was sought on the ground that the contemnor had violated the condition of the tenancy and the premises were not kept in proper condition and the arrears of rent w.e.f. 10th September, 1990 were due against the contemnor. It was further contended that the premises in question had been sub-let by the contemnor to M/s. Goyanka Exhibitors by parting with its possession during the subsistence of tenancy in violation of the terms of the agreement. Eviction was also sought on the ground of personal bona fide necessity.
(3.) After framing the issues and hearing both the parties, learned trial Court vide its judgement and decree dated 13-1-1995 decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff-petitioner. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgement and decree the defendant-contemnor filed an appeal in this Court which was registered as Regular First Appeal No. 57/95 and the said appeal was listed for hearing on 10th March, 1995 when the record was called for. The said appeal was finally heard and rejected by this Court vide its judgement dated 23rd March, 1995. Thereafter the appellant-contemnor preferred a review which was registered as S. B. Civil Review Petition No. 36/95. During the course of hearing of the review petition an under-taking was given to this Court on 4-4-1995 by the contemnor to the effect that in the event of rejection of his review petition on merits by this Court, he will be bound by the decree and that the contemnor shall pay the decretal amount to the decree-holder-petitioner. Keeping this aspect of the matter in view this Court vide its order, dated 4-4-1995 had directed that it shall be open to the contemnor that if he intends to prefer a special appeal he will be at liberty to do so and while relying upon the undertaking given by the contemnor-respondent herein, stayed the execution of the decree by its order dated 4-4-1995. The undertaking dated 4-4-1995 of the contemnor was to the following effect : "The counsel for the petitioner have stated that in case of rejection of the review petition the petitioner shall make the payment of decreetal amount to the non-petitioner". In view of the aforesaid undertaking, the earlier orders passed by this Court were kept in abeyance till 14-4-1995. The review petition was rejected by this Court by its order dated 24-4-1995. A special appeal was preferred by the contemnor which was registered as D. B. Special Appeal No. 23/95. During the course of hearing of the said appeal on 4-4-1995 the contemnor handed over a cheque of Rupees 1,00,000/- (One lakh) to the learned counsel for the petitioner against rent/damages which were due against the contemnor. It was specifically directed by this Court that the above amount shall be adjusted against the dues and subject to the decision of the special appeal. The matter was directed to be heard on 16th May, 1995 with a direction to the parties to maintain status quo regarding possession of the suit property. On 16th May, 1995 a request was made by the learned counsel for the contemnor that his possession be protected for some time so as to enable him to approach the Apex Court with a view to challenge the legality and validity of the judgements and orders passed in the proceedings. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case six months' time was granted to the contemnor on usual terms that he shall pay the amount of rent/mesne profits regularly to the petitioner. ;