1/4 (Contempt Petition No. 50 of 2001) 2025:CGHC:4760 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 50 OF 2001  State of Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) Versus  Ram Prakash, S/o Late Keshar Singh, aged about 38 years, Occupation- Cloth Merchant, R/o Ward No.10, Bilha, District Bilaspur. ... Respondent(s) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner-State :- Mr. Sharad Mishra, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent :- Ms. Priya Mishra and Mr. Nitikesh Gupta, Advocates, on behalf of Dr. N.K. Shukla, Senior Advocate. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Single Bench Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board [21-01-2025] 1. The original Contempt Petitioner i.e. Govindlal Bagga (Since died, through his Legal Representatives), filed Contempt Petition No.18/2001 for non-compliance of Order dated 7.7.2020 and 27.3.2001 passed by this Court in Civil Revision No.1233/2000 filed by the Respondents/Contemnors. 2/4 (Contempt Petition No. 50 of 2001) 2. The VII Additional District Judge, Bilaspur had passed judgment and decree dated 8.5.2000 in Civil Case No.53-A/1998 directing the Respondents/ Contemnors to hand over the vacant possession of the suit building. However, against the said judgment and decree, the Respondents/Contemnors preferred Civil Revision No.1233/2000 before this Court in which interim orders were passed on 7.7.2000 and thereafter on 27.3.2001 directing that if the applicants (Respondents/Contemnors herein) are still in possession, they shall not be dispossessed in execution of the decree. 3. It is thereafter on 31.3.2001 the original applicant/ petitioner (Late Govindlal Bagga) filed the said Contempt Petition No.18/2001 against the Respondents/Contemnors for non-compliance of the the interim orders dated 7.7.2000 and 27.3.2001 passed by this Court in Civil Revision No.1233/2000 which ultimately stood dismissed on 2.2.2015 for want of prosecution. The said Contempt Petition No.18/ 2001 has been finally decided by this Court by passing a separate order today itself. 3/4 (Contempt Petition No. 50 of 2001) 4. In the said Contempt Petition No.18/2001, on 25.8.2001, this Court had directed to issue notice to Respondent/Contemnor No.2 - Ram Prakash to show cause for having filed a false reply and affirming the same in his affidavit by saying that the statement is true to his personal knowledge and belief. In this regard, the present Contempt Petition was registered suo moto. On 10.10.2001, in compliance of the Order dated 25.8.2001, the Respondent/Contemnor No.2 – Ram Prakash filed his reply to the show cause notice. 5. Since the present Contempt Petition has only been issued that a false reply has been filed by Respondent/Contemnor No.2 – Ram Prakash affirming his statement in his affidavit to be true to his personal knowledge and belief and since the question of execution of decree is already pending separately between the Contempt Petitioners and the Contemnors, considering the reply of Contemnor/ Respondent No.2 – Ram Prakash and that the basic issue of execution of decree is already pending before this Court in W.P. (227) No.509/2020 and further taking into account the fact that at the time of filing of his reply he was aged about 50 years on 10.10.2001 and now he must be aged about 74-75 years, I accept 4/4 (Contempt Petition No. 50 of 2001) his unconditional apology which appears to be bonafide directing him to be careful in further in filing affidavit. 6. The present Contempt Petition accordingly stands closed. 7. However, the present order of this Court shall not prejudice the right of the parties in W.P. (227) No.509/2020. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge sharad SHARAD KUMAR YADAV Digitally signed by SHARAD KUMAR YADAV Date: 2025.01.28 14:44:20 +0530