Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2393 (RAJ)

Pooja Harsh v. Vitthal Harsh

2017-11-02

GOVIND MATHUR, VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

body2017
ORDER : 1. By the order dated 09.03.2017 this Court disposed of D.B Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 687/2010 with following order and direction: “Having considered all facts of the case and also looking to the responsibilities and liabilities of the appellant, we deem it appropriate to affirm the divorce decree, passed by the Family Court, Jodhpur dated 28.05.2010 in Civil Original Case No. 159/2003, provided the respondent-applicant pay a lump-sum alimony in a tune of Rs. 22,00,000/- (twenty two lacs) within a period of three months from today to the appellant. The total amount is required to be deposited in four parts including a Fixed Deposit in a tune of Rs. 6,00,000/- (six lacs) in the name of Smt. Pooja in her joint account with her son Shri. Jai Govind @ Girdhar, another Fixed Deposit shall also be of Rs. 6,00,000/- (six lacs) in the name of Shri. Jai Govind @ Girdhar in a joint account with Smt. Pooja, the appellant. The term of both the Fixed Deposits referred above shall be of five years. The third Fixed Deposit of Rs. 5,00,000/- (five lacs) shall be in the name of Smt. Pooja for a term of six months. The remaining amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- (five lacs) shall be deposited in the Saving Bank Account of Smt. Pooja. The decree passed by the trial court also stands modified in the terms referred above. The appeal stands disposed of.” 2. As per the averments contained in the application to initiate proceedings under Contempt of Court Act, 1971 no compliance of any direction given under the order aforesaid has yet been made. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent does not dispute this fact. The deliberate and willful non-compliance of the directions given is apparent. Notice, thus, is given to the respondent as to why he be not subjected to proceedings under the Act of 1971 and further be punished for committing contempt of court. The notice issued is accepted by Shri. Anirudh Purohit, who is already representing the respondent. 4. Let this contempt petition be re-notified on 07.11.2017 5. The respondents Shri. Vitthal Harash S/o Shri. Om Prakash Harsh, R/o New Chandpole Road, Opposite Bijlighar Office, Jodhpur (Raj.) is required to remain personally present before this Court on next date of hearing.