A private company owner, who is an accused in a cheque bounce case, has been held guilty for contempt of court by the Delhi High Court for not complying with the undertaking he furnished in a trial court.
In a judgement, Justice Manmohan said "it is a case of willful breach of undertakings given to the executing court and I hold the petitioner guilty of contempt of court," and fixed on March 9 as the date to pass the order on quantum of sentence.
Justice Manmohan dismissed two petitions filed by accused Rajiv Kapoor, proprietor of M/s Welcome Enterprises, and his mother Santosh Kapoor challenging the trial court's order dismissing their pleas in February last year.
"I am of the view that right from the beginning Rajiv Kapoor had no intention of paying any amount and he agreed for a settlement and gave post-dated cheques as well as repeated undertakings," Justice Manmohan said in the judgement.
"Only with the intent of gaining time and delaying the execution proceedings Kapoor intentionally adopted such a course of action, despite having the option of selling at least his share of DDA flat in order to comply his undertakings," the court said.
Kapoor has been facing a recovery suit filed by another company, Apex Computer Private Ltd, after his cheque amounting Rs 1.61 lakh bounced, before a sessions court since 2002.
He was granted bail by the court after he had given an undertaking that by December 2002 he would pay the amount with interest of 21 per cent but he failed to pay on time and sought the court's time till February 2003. Kapoor gave several undertakings but failed to pay the amount on time following which, the trial court forfeited his bail bond and issued NBW.
In December 2006, Kapoor failed to comply with the court's warrant and did not appear before the court.
For non-compliance of its order, the sessions judge directed the attachment of his DDA flat in Shalimar Bagh in February last year.
Meanwhile Kapoor's mother, to avoid the attachment of house, filed an application before the trail court stating that she has disowned her son and he has no claim over the properties, including the DDA flat.
However, the court dismissed her plea. Challenging which she approached the High Court. On the other hand, Kapoor too challenged the trial court's warrant order against him.