B.R. Gavai JUDGMENT
B.R. Gavai, J.
1. The present contempt petition arises out of an unfortunate family dispute between a father on one hand and his two sons from his first wife on the other hand. This family dispute has given rise to number of proceedings, some of which have even reached up to this Court.
2. Factual matrix necessary for the adjudication of the present case is thus:
The Petitioner in the contempt petition Rama Narang was married to Smt. Motia. The Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 i.e. Ramesh Narang and Rajesh Narang so also Rakesh Narang are sons of the Petitioner and Smt. Motia. The Petitioner and Smt. Motia divorced in 1963. The Petitioner thereafter married Smt. Mona. Out of the said wedlock, two sons Rohit and Rahul as well as a daughter Ramona were born.
3. In a previous round of litigation between these parties, the Respondent No. 1- Ramesh Narang had approached this Court by filing a Contempt Petition (C) Nos. 265-67 of 1999 in Contempt Petition (C) No. 209 of 1998 in Civil Appeal Nos. 366 of 1998, 603 of 1998 and 605 of 1998. The present Petitioner Rama Narang was Respondent No. 1 in the said proceedings. This Court passed the following order in the said proceedings on 2nd November 2001:
In Conmt. Pet. (C) Nos. 265-267/1999 in Conmt. Pet. (C) No. 209/1998 in Civil Appeal No. 366/1998, 603/1998 & 605/1998.
After hearing Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, learned Senior Counsel for the alleged contemnor, at length, we are satisfied that the contemnor has flouted the order of this Court dated 4th May, 1999 by not transferring 50% of the share (and contending that he could make out the 50% share only by calculating the shares of NIHPL held by M/s. Fashion Wears Private Ltd., which have been forbidden by the order dated 22.01.1998). We call upon the contemnor to show cause regarding the punishment to be imposed on him for which he shall be present in this Court on 29th November, 2001.
I.A. No. 6 in C.P. (C) No. 209/1998 in C.A. No. 366/1998.
Dismissed as withdrawn.
List all matters on 29th November, 2001.
4. It appears, that subsequently the matter was settled between the parties and the parties had placed on record the Minutes of the Consent Order. It will be apposite to reproduce the entire order passed by this Court on 12th December 2001:
The following cases are pending between the parties who are parties in the present proceedings before us one way or the other. We are told that all the parties have settled their disputes in respect of all the litigations specified below.
1. O.S. No. 3535 of 1994 before the Bombay High Court.
2. O.S. No. 3578 of 1994 before the Bombay High Court.
3. O.S. No. 1105 of 1998 before the Bombay High Court.
4. O.S. No. 3469 of 1996 before the Bombay High Court.
5. O.S. No. 1792 of 1998 before the Bombay High Court.
6. O.S. No. 320 of 1991 before the Bombay High Court.
7. Company Petition No. 28 of 1992 Before the Principal Bench, Company Law Board, New Delhi.
8. Arbitration Suit No. 5110 of 1994 before the Bombay High Court.
Today they filed a document styled it as "MINUTES OF CONSENT ORDER" signed by all the parties. Learned Counsel appearing on both sides submitted that all the parties have signed this document. Today except Mona Narang and Ramona Narang (two ladies), all the rest of the parties are present before us when these ........