AIR 2009 RAJASTHAN 147 ::2009 (6) AKAR (NOC) 978 (RAJ) ::2009 (6) AIR Kar R 978 ::2009 A I H C (NOC) 975 (RAJ) ::(2009) 3 WLC (RAJ) 253 ::(2009) 3 CivilCourtC 748 ::(2010) 1 Raj LW 669

Rajasthan High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): Dalip Singh , J

Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , O.39 R.2A(2)— Disobedience of injunction order - Court has jurisdiction to direct contemner to restore status quo ante and pay compensation to injured party. Once the Court comes to the conclusion that breach of the order is committed, it has the jurisdiction to pass an order of attachment of the property of the contemner and at the same time for the detention of the contemner in civil prison. The significance of the words "if the disobedience or breach continues" emphasizes that the contemner having been found guilty and once an order of punishment has been passed can be directed to obey the directions contained in the order of temporary injunction passed under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. as in sub-rule (2) the important words are "if the disobedience or the breach continues" suggest that the contemner is under an obligation to comply and purge himself of the contempt. Failure to do so would entail the consequences as provided under sub-rule (2) of Rule 2A of Order 39 C.P.C. i.e. sale of the attached property and payment of compensation to the injured party. This indicates that failure, the injured party can be permitted to restore the status quo ante and claim the compensation and cost for the expenses incurred. Thus, the order passed by trial Court though without the attachment of the property of the petitioner ....