Proceedings Can Be Initiated Even Against Stranger For Disobedience Or Breach Of Injunction Under Order 39 Rule 2A CPC: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that a person who is not a party before theTrial Court can be made as a party respondent under Order 39, Rule 2-A of the Civil Procedure Code.

The Court also held that no illegality was committed by the Court below in issuing the process to the petitioner, as the process can also be issued under Order 39, Rule 2-A of the Civil Procedure Code to a stranger.

The Bench of Justice Ajay Mohjan Goel observed, “In terms of the said provision, in the case of disobedience of any injunction granted or other order made under Rule 1 or Rule 2 of Order 39, Rule 2-A of the Civil Procedure Code or breach of any of the terms on which the injunction was granted or the order made, the Court granting the injunction or making the order, or any Court to which the suit or proceeding is transferred, may order the property of the person guilty of such disobedience or breach to be attached, and may also order such person to be detained in the civil prison for a term not exceeding three months. This provision per se, does not restricts itself to the parties in the lis. The expression usual therein is ‘person’.”

Advocate Rajiv Rai represented the Petitioner, while Advocate Surya Chauhan represented the Respondent.

Case Brief

The Petitioner filed a petition seeking to quash the entire proceeding under Order 39, Rule 2-A CPC. The Petitioner contended that there was no allegation against him which can be said to be an allegation of willful disobedience of any direction passed by the Court below as he was not even the party in the civil suit.

While the Respondent contended that the Petitioner not only disobeyed the Court orders, but he also instigated the offending respondents, who were also violating the Court orders.

Court’s Observation

The issue before the Court was whether under Order 39, Rule 2-A of the Civil Procedure Code, a person who is not a party before the learned Trial Court, can be made as a party respondent or not.

The High Court referred to Order 39, Rule 2-A CPC, which deals with the consequences of disobedience or breach of injunction. In terms of the said provision, in the case of disobedience of any injunction granted or other order made under Rule 1 or Rule 2 of Order 39, Rule 2-A of the Civil Procedure Code or breach of any of the terms on which the injunction was granted or the order made, the Court granting the injunction may order the property of the person guilty of such disobedience or breach to be attached, and may also order such person to be detained in the civil prison for a term not exceeding three months.

“This provision per se, does not restricts itself to the parties in the lis. The expression usual therein is person”, the Court added.

The Court further observed that the present petitioner can prove his innocence by proving:

(a) the order was not within his knowledge,

(b) that he did not disobey the order,

(c) that he has committed no act which can be inferred to be an act, which can be construed to be the disobedience of the Court order,

(d) that the Court order was neither produced nor made available for the perusal of the Court.

Therefore, the Court held that no illegality was committed by the Court below in issuing the process to the Petitioner, as the process can also be issued under Order 39, Rule 2-A of the Civil Procedure Code to a stranger.

Accordingly, the Petition was dismissed.

Cause Title: Santosh Kumar V. Pushpa Devi & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:HHC:32837)

Click here to read/download Judgment