24 November 2010
Supreme Court
Download

D.M.BELGAMVALA Vs M/S TAMILNADU REAL ESTATES (P) LTD.

Bench: MARKANDEY KATJU,GYAN SUDHA MISRA, , ,
Case number: SLP(C) No.-013704-013704 / 2010
Diary number: 13792 / 2010
Advocates: Vs V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN


1

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COPURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

I.A. NO 2/2010 in S.L.P (C) No. 13704/2010

D.M.Belgamvala ..Petitioner/        Applicant

versus

M/s Tamilnadu Real Estates (P) Ltd. ..Respondent

WITH

Contempt Petition No.289 of 2010 IN

S.L.P.(C) NO.13704 OF 2010

O R D E R  

This is a typical case of a litigant trying to take  

this Court for a ride.

In  this  case,  the  landlord  had  filed  an  eviction  

petition  against  the  petitioner-tenant  which  had  been  

decreed by the courts below, including the High Court.  The  

eviction was granted on the ground that the building in  

question is more than 100 years old and needed demolition  

and  fresh  construction.   The  Special  Leave  Petition  (C)  

No. 13704 of 2010 filed by the petitioner against the order  

of the High Court was dismissed by this Court by order  

dated 14.05.2010 and the petitioner (tenant) was granted  

six months time from 14.05.2010 to vacate the premises in  

question subject to filing usual undertaking before this  

Court.  The petitioner had furnished the undertaking to  

-2-

2

vacate the premises in question as directed by this Court.

Despite  this  undertaking,  the  petitioner  has  not  

vacated,  and  instead  he  has  filed  this  application  on  

12.11.2010 praying for a direction that the petitioner need  

not vacate the suit premises till the final orders passed  

in the Review Petition or in the alternative grant stay of  

dispossession of the petitioner from the suit premises.

In our opinion, this application is a sheer abuse of  

the process of the court.

Along with the application an order dated 18.06.2010  

of the Commissioner, Corporation  of Chennai has been filed  

purporting  to  revoke  the  permission  to  demolish  the  

property  in  question.   We  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  

Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai is hand-in-glove with  

the   petitioner  and  it  is  for  this  reason  that  he  has  

passed  this  collusive  and  contemptuous   order  dated  

18.06.2010  merely  to  get  over  our  order  dismissing  the  

Special Leave Petition on 14.05.2010.

Issue contempt of court notice to the Commissioner,  

Corporation of Chennai as well as to the petitioner in this  

case to show cause why they should not be punished for  

contempt of court for trying to take this Court for a ride  

and set at naught our order dated 14.5.2010.

We further direct that the petitioner be evicted from  

the premises in question forthwith by using police force  

-3-

ignoring  the  order  of  stay  of  eviction  which  we  are

3

informed  has  been  passed  by  the  High  Court.   If  the  

petitioner  or  anyone  tries  to  obstruct  this  order,  he  

should know now that he will definitely be sent to jail.  

There  is  a  limit  of  tolerance  by  this  Court  and  the  

petitioner has crossed that limit.

We are informed that the petitioner had, long after we  

dismissed  the  Special  Leave  Petition  on  14.05.2010,  

approached the Madras High Court and obtained a stay of  

eviction.  We are surprised that the Madras High Court has  

flouted  the  order  of  this  Court  dismissing  the  Special  

Leave Petition on 14.05.2010. This was not expected of the  

Madras High Court.  Judicial discipline requires that the  

High Courts should not try to override orders passed by  

this Court.  Such defiant attitude of the High Courts will  

not be tolerated by this Court.

With these observations, the interlocutory application  

is dismissed.

Copy of this order be sent to the Registrar General of  

the Madras High Court who will place it before the Chief  

Justice of the High Court.  The Registrar General will send  

a report to this Court mentioning how and why a stay order  

was  granted  by  the  High  Court  despite  our  order  dated  

14.05.2010.

-4-

Contempt Petition No. 289 of 2010 in Special Leave Petition  (C.) No. 13704/2010

4

Contempt Petition is taken on board.

We  are  informed  that  this  contempt  petition  in  the  

Special Leave Petition (C.) No. 13704/2010 has been filed  

by  the  respondent  herein.  The  order  passed  in  the  

interlocutory  application  above  will  also  govern  this  

contempt petition.

Issue notice.

List the contempt petition on 12.01.2011.

............................J. [MARKANDEY KATJU]

NEW DELHI; ............................J. NOVEMBER 24, 2010 [GYAN SUDHA MISRA]