Summary
The Court dismissed review of the finding holding Vijay Mallya guilty of contempt for incomplete asset disclosure and breach of restraint orders. It acknowledged that the earlier judgment incorrectly stated that no reply had been filed, but examination of the omitted reply showed no prejudice: it neither disputed the relevant undertaking and orders nor explained the breach. Repetition of arguments already rejected did not justify rehearing in review.
Issues
- Whether overlooking a filed reply justified review of the contempt finding.
- Whether the reply contained material affecting the grounds on which contempt had been found.
Held
- The judgment under review had erroneously proceeded on the premise that no reply had been filed. The review petitions were heard in open court and the omitted reply examined to determine whether that error prejudiced the petitioner. (¶¶ 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11)
- The reply did not contradict the undertaking before DRT or the High Court restraint orders, dispute their purport, or supply an explanation undermining the contempt finding. It repeated earlier submissions. The identified omission therefore did not justify interference. (¶¶ 9, 10, 11, 12)
- Arguments concerning compliance with the Supreme Court’s disclosure directions and its exercise of contempt jurisdiction had already been considered and rejected. Review could not be used to obtain a rehearing on those submissions. (¶¶ 3, 10, 12)
Result
Review petitions dismissed. Mallya directed to appear on 5 October 2020 at 2 p.m. for the contempt proceedings concerning punishment; Ministry of Home Affairs directed to facilitate and ensure his presence. Contempt petitions listed for that date.