Contempt of Court in case where Court lack Jurisdiction.

in case of subject matter jurisdiction with the court, the person should be liable for contempt of interim orders even if pecuniary or territorial jurisdiction is missing. this is a personal view and not based on any precedent

Dear Anish and Meenakshi, I have noted your views. But why should the innocent litigants suffered just because of the wroung assumption of jurisdictions by the Civil court?

Assumi! I am with you. Three days back my similar case has been dismissed in which contempt of court proceedings under order 39 Rule 2A were also involved and both stand dismissed on the similar ground as raised in quarry. Citations were also produced. so no chance to face contemp in such case.

Dear Raj,  In Corpus Juris Secundum Vol XVII para 19 it says " Disobedience of or resistance to avoid mandate, order, judgement or decree or one issued by a Court without jurisdiction of the subject-matter and parties litigant, is not contempt and where the court has no jurisdiction to make the order, no waiver can cut off the rights of the party to attack its validity. Moreover, the practise in Indian Courts is that no one should suffer because of the mistake of the court.. Article 21 of the Constitution of India also says No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law" so why should the innocent plaintiff or defendant be made to deprived of their personal liberty by the court by assuming wroungful jurisdictions by adopting procedure which is not established by law?

I agree with Raj Sir and Assumi Sir.  It is a settled law that the order passed by Court lacking inherent jurisdiction is null and void.  Person cannot be punished for flouting the such an order.

I AGREE WITH RAJ