L.P.A.No.3 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20.08.2026 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN L.P.A.No.3 of 2021 N.Gopal S/o.Neelaperumal 27, Govindarajan Street West Tambaram Chennai 600 044. .. Appellant Vs. The President Central Government Officials and State General Administrators Housing Welfare Society 21/3, CPWD Quarters Besant Nagar Chennai 600 090. .. Respondent Prayer :Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent seeking to against the order dated 31.03.2021 passed in Contempt Petition No.2705 of 2016. For Appellant : Mr.T.Arockia Dass For Respondent : Mr.G.Prabhu __________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis L.P.A.No.3 of 2021 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) This appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 31.03.2021 passed in Contempt Petition No.2705 of 2016, wherein, a direction was issued to appellant to pay interest for Rs.7.20 crores received by him from respondent within four weeks, failing which, sentence will be pronounced against appellant. 2. Learned counsel for appellant submitted that the learned Single Judge exceeded his jurisdiction in directing appellant to pay interest with a default clause and that such a direction could not have been issued in the contempt petition, as it amounts to exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the order deserves to be set aside. 3. The Apex Court, in Midnapore Peoples' Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Chunilal Nanda1, in paragraph 11(V), has held that if the High Court, for whatever reason, decides an issue or makes any direction, relating to the merits of the dispute between the parties, in a contempt 1(2006) 5 SCC 399 __________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis L.P.A.No.3 of 2021 proceedings, the aggrieved person is not without remedy. Such an order is open to challenge in an intra-court appeal (if the order was of a learned Single Judge and there is a provision for an intra-court appeal), or by seeking special leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. 4. The scope of contempt jurisdiction is well settled. In Sudhir Vasudeva v. M.George Ravishekeran2, the Supreme Court clearly delineated the boundaries of contempt powers. At paragraph 19, the Supreme Court held thus: “19. The power vested in the High Courts as well as this Court to punish for contempt is a special and rare power available both under the Constitution as well as the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. It is a drastic power which, if misdirected, could even curb the liberty of the individual charged with commission of contempt. The very nature of the power casts a sacred duty in the Courts to exercise the same with the greatest of care and caution. This is also necessary as, more often than not, adjudication of a contempt plea involves a process of self-determination of the sweep, meaning and effect of the order in respect of which 2(2014) 3 SCC 373 __________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis L.P.A.No.3 of 2021 disobedience is alleged. The Courts must not, therefore, travel beyond the four corners of the order which is alleged to have been flouted or enter into questions that have not been dealt with or decided in the judgment or the order violation of which is alleged. Only such directions which are explicit in a judgment or order or are plainly self-evident ought to be taken into account for the purpose of consideration as to whether there has been any disobedience or wilful violation of the same. Decided issues cannot be reopened; nor can the plea of equities be considered. The Courts must also ensure that while considering a contempt plea the power available to the Court in other corrective jurisdictions like review or appeal is not trenched upon. No order or direction supplemental to what has been already expressed should be issued by the Court while exercising jurisdiction in the domain of the contempt law; such an exercise is more appropriate in other jurisdictions vested in the Court, as noticed above. The above principles would appear to be the cumulative outcome of the precedents cited at the Bar, namely, Jhareswar Prasad Paul v. Tarak Nath Ganguly, (2002) 5 SCC 352; V.M. Manohar __________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis L.P.A.No.3 of 2021 Prasad v. N. Ratnam Raju, (2004) 13 SCC 610, Bihar Finance Service House ConstructionCoop. Society Ltd. v. Gautam Goswami. (2008) 5 SCC 339, and Union of India v. Subedar Devassy PV, (2006) 1 SCC 613.” [emphasis supplied] 5. The law laid down by the Supreme Court establishes three clear rules: (i) A court exercising contempt jurisdiction cannot travel beyond the explicit terms of the original order; (ii) Contempt jurisdiction cannot be used to issue fresh, additional, or supplemental directions to expand the original order; and (iii) Contempt proceedings cannot re-examine or modify issues already decided, nor can they usurp corrective jurisdictions like review or appeal. 6. Admittedly, the learned Single Judge has exceeded his jurisdiction in directing appellant to pay interest for the amount received from respondent within a specific period, with a default clause, which, certainly amounts to exercising the writ jurisdiction __________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis L.P.A.No.3 of 2021 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 7. In view of the aforesaid and the observation in Midnapore Peoples' Coop. Bank Ltd. (supra) and Sudhir Vasudeva (supra), the impugned order dated 31.03.2021 cannot be allowed to stand. Accordingly, the same is set aside. The Contempt Petition No.2705 of 2016 is restored to its original position. The learned Single Judge is requested to proceed from that stage and deal with the contempt petition in accordance with law. 8. The appeal stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. (SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI,CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J) 20.08.2026 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No kpl __________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis L.P.A.No.3 of 2021 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND G.ARUL MURUGAN,J. (kpl) L.P.No.3 of 2021 20.08.2026 __________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis