COCP-2945-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 109 COCP-2945-2026 Date of decision : 03.07.2026 Capital Bolts and Hardwares ...... Petitioner V/S Vijay Nagpal and Anr. ..... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present: Mr.Aayush Gupta, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Suri, Advocate, Mr. Rohit Suri, Advocate and Mr. Saharth Suri, Advocate for respondents. **** AMARJOT BHATTI J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioner filed present contempt petition under Section 10 and 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for initiating the contempt proceedings against the respondents for willful disobedience of the order dated 29.05.2026 (Annexure P-1) passed in CWP No.15636 of 2026 titled as “Capital Bolts and Hardwares versus ICICI Bank and Another”. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is a proprietorship firm, i.e., Capital Bolts and Hardwares, having various credit facilities availed from the respondents through its branch situated in Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana. The said credit facilities include an OD Limit, Working Capital Term Loan, Machinery Term Loan, PCFC (Limit Against Export), and Home Loan with LAP and there had been no default from the side of the petitioner till date and all the credit facilities were running up to date. Since there were long-standing relations, the respondents offered a derivative/forward contract facility to the petitioner, which was renewed on 21.04.2025. As per the policy of the Reserve Bank of India, the derivative SUNIL DEVI 2026.07.06 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-2945-2026 -2- contract was sanctioned to the extent of Rs.40 Crores, which was four times the permissible limit as required by the RBI. During this, the respondents illegally started demanding Rs.4.58 Crores from the petitioner for the usage of the derivative limit. The said demand was disputed by the petitioner. However, in order to show his bona fide, he deposited an amount of Rs.77,06,422/- initially and requested the bank to update his account and settle the things accordingly. He filed CWP No.15636 of 2026 titled as “Capital Bolts and Hardwares versus ICICI Bank and Another”. The matter was taken up on 29.05.2026. The petitioner gave a statement that he shall deposit Rs.75 Lakhs within three working days so as to settle the matter. In pursuance of this, in the aforesaid civil writ petition, order dated 29.05.2026 (Annexure P-1) was passed. Accordingly, the petitioner deposited Rs.75 Lakhs in his Current Account No. 001705014811, which was ultimately debited in compliance with the aforesaid order. Despite due compliance, during the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition, in an illegal manner, the bank froze the account of the petitioner, and since then he has been unable to operate his account. A copy of the e-mail is Annexure P-3. Contempt notice dated 08.06.2026, along with receipts, are Annexure P-4 and P-5. In this way, the respondents have deliberately disobeyed the directions of the Court as detailed in the impugned order dated 29.05.2026 (Annexure P-1). 3. On the other hand, on advance notice Mr. Sandeep Suri, Advocate appeared on behalf of the respondents and denied the facts narrated by the petitioner. It is pointed out that there is no willful disobedience of the directions given by the Court in CWP No.15636 of 2026 vide order dated 29.05.2026 (Annexure P-1). Regarding the legal notice sent by the petitioner, a detailed reply (Annexure P-6) was sent to the petitioner wherein the facts and SUNIL DEVI 2026.07.06 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-2945-2026 -3- circumstances under which the action was taken were duly explained. It is pointed out that the PCFC/EPC facility was sanctioned for a fixed tenure of 12 months. The credit agreement letter, duly signed by the petitioner, is dated 23.06.2025. All sanction limits expired on 22.06.2026. On the expiry of the sanction facility, there is no automatic continuation of credit benefits and continuation of the credit facilities beyond the stipulated expiry date is not a matter of right. It was pointed out that there was no freezing of the account after the expiry of the said credit facility, in fact, it was cessation of credit facility. 4. I have considered the aforesaid factual position with the able assistance of learned counsel for the parties. CWP No.15636-2026 is pending for 18.08.2026. On deposit of Rs.75 Lakhs, the matter was to be listed before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre on 06.07.2026. The respondents categorically stated that there was no freezing of account, in fact, the credit facility availed by the petitioners was for fixed tenure which had expired. 5. Considering the aforesaid factual position, I do not find any reason to proceed with the present contempt petition and the same is accordingly declined. 5. Both the parties are at liberty to raise the issue in CWP-15636- 2026 pending for 18.08.2026. 6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand disposed of accordingly as well. (AMARJOT BHATTI ) JUDGE 03.07.2026. Sunil Devi Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No SUNIL DEVI 2026.07.06 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document