CCP(S) No. 196/2022 in WP(C) No. 2031/2019 Page 1 of 2 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case No.:- CCP(S) No. 196/2022 in WP(C) No. 2031/2019 Date of pronouncement:-08.12.2025 Uploaded on:- 10.12.2025 Mangu Ram Gupta ….. Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Amrish Kapoor, Advocate Q Vs Arun Mehta & Ors. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Pawan Dev Singh, Dy. AG Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE ORDER(ORAL) 1. Upon coming of the instant contempt petition for consideration, the counsel for the respondents produced a copy of communication dated 03.12.2025 issued by the Additional Registrar Cooperative Societies, addressed to the Manager J&K Bank Town Hall Branch, Jammu, and would submit that the amount of interest payable to the petitioner in terms of order dated 29.10.2025 stands calculated to Rs. 2,56,106/- and also ordered to be credited in the bank account of petitioner. The said communication produced by the counsel for the respondents is taken on record. 2. Under these circumstances, contempt notice issued is recalled and proceedings are closed, with liberty to the petitioner that in the event petitioner is dissatisfied with the aforesaid amount of interest calculated by the respondents/contemnors payable to the petitioner, he shall be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum in appropriate proceedings. 3. At this stage, it is stated by the counsel for the petitioner that neither salary nor other retiral benefits have been paid to the petitioner by the S. No. 11 CCP(S) No. 196/2022 in WP(C) No. 2031/2019 Page 2 of 2 respondents. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, in rebuttal referred to the status report dated 18.02.2025 and invited the attention of this Court to para 3 thereof, wherein, it has been stated that in compliance with the order of this Court dated 02.01.2025, the matter pertaining to the petitioner was reviewed in consultation with the liquidator of the JAKFED and based on the available records, the petitioner stands paid an amount of Rs. 11,13,859/- as part of the retiral benefits including the CPF amount (both shares) and that no further amount is payable to the petitioner as per the available records, as the petitioner has erroneously claimed an amount of Rs. 2,24,608/- on account of salary minus interest. 4. In view of the aforesaid conflicting versions of the parties in their respective pleadings, this Court is of the considered opinion that the said conflicting claims cannot be settled or adjudicated upon in exercise of contempt jurisdiction. Accordingly, contempt notice issued is recalled and proceedings are closed. (Javed Iqbal Wani) Judge Jammu 08.12.2025 Diksha