Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : P.JAGMOHAN REDDY, VENKATESAM
Kruthiventi Kutumba Rao - Appellant
Versus
Muthi Venkata Subba Rao - Respondent
Decided On : 07-18-67
CONTEMPT OF COURT - OBSTRUCTION OF COMMISSIONER - ACCOUNT BOOKS - SEIZURE - POLICE ASSISTANCE - JURISDICTION - VALIDITY OF ORDER - CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS - PUNISHMENT.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a founder member and secretary of the Velidendla Hanumantharaya Grandhalayam, filed a suit for a permanent injunction restraining the secretary from functioning as secretary of the Executive Committee alleging mismanagement of the library's affairs. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner filed an application for the appointment of an advocate commissioner to seize the account books and other records of the library. The court issued a warrant to the commissioner to seize the items mentioned in the petition and file them in court. The commissioner, accompanied by the petitioner and his advocates, went to the library to execute the warrant. However, the respondents, who were the librarian, treasurer, and secretary of the Building Construction Committee of the library, obstructed the commissioner from executing the warrant and prevented him from seizing the account books.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondents had obstructed the commissioner from executing the warrant and had prevented him from seizing the account books. The court also found that the respondents had not tendered any apology for their actions. The court held that the respondents' conduct was contumacious and that they had caused obstructions to the execution of the orders of the court.
Issues: 1. Whether the respondents had obstructed the commissioner from executing the warrant and had prevented him from seizing the account books? 2. Whether the respondents' conduct was contumacious and had caused obstructions to the execution of the orders of the court?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the respondents had obstructed the commissioner from executing the warrant and had prevented him from seizing the account books based on the following evidence: a. The commissioner's report, which stated that the respondents had refused to cooperate with him and had prevented him from executing the warrant. b. The petitioner's affidavit, which corroborated the commissioner's report. c. The fact that the respondents had not tendered any apology for their actions. 2. The court held that the respondents' conduct was contumacious and had caused obstructions to the execution of the orders of the court based on the following: a. The respondents' refusal to cooperate with the commissioner and their prevention of him from executing the warrant. b. The respondents' subsequent attempt to justify their actions as if the orders were issued without jurisdiction. c. The respondents' failure to tender any apology for their actions.
Final Decision: The court convicted the respondents for contempt of court and sentenced each of them to two months simple imprisonment.
( 1 ) THIS is a petition to commit Respondents Nos. 1 to 6 for contempt for violating the orders of the District Munsif, Vijayawada, by obstructing the Advocate Commissioner Sr. P. V. Rama Sarma while performing the duties directed in the warrant issued to him in I. A. No. 179/67 in O. S. No. 78/67, that it for seizing the account books and papers ( items 1 to 19) mentioned in the petition and to file the same in the court
( 2 ) THE petitioner is founder member of Sri Velidendla Hanumantharaya Grandhalayam which was founded in the year 1934 in memory of the late Mr. Velidendla Hanumantha Rao. He is also the Secretary for a long time and the joint secretary of the Executive Treasurer of the library. In 1944 the library was registered as No. 2/44 under the Societies Act, and he is one of the persons who had subscribed to the memorandum of Association. In 1964, during the General Body Meeting the strength of the Executive was increased by providing for one president, three-vice presidents one General Secretary, three Assistant Secretaries, one Treasurer and 16 members, in total not exceeding 25. The present Executive committee of the library is elected on 9-2-64. The term of office of the Committee was two years, and one Pothina Gurunatha Banergi was elected as General Secretary. The petitioner filed O. S. No. 78/67 on the file of the District Munsif, Vijayawada for a permanent injunction restraining the Secretary from functioning as secretary of the Executive Committee alleging that the secretary mismanaged the affairs of the library. It is stated in the plaint that he did not keep the accounts properly and failed to convene the General Body Meeting for electing the New Executive for the last one year and that the library funds running into several thousands of rupees were misappropriated and mismanaged. The petitioner filed I. A. no. 179/67 for appointing an advocate as a commissioner to make an inventory of the Account Books, Bank Books, Cheque Books, Minute Books and all other records of the library and file them in the Court. On this I. A. a warrant dated 4-3-67 was issued to seize items 1 to 19 mentioned in the petition and file them in Court with an inventory. On 5-3-67 a commissioner was appointed who with the help of Respondents Nos. 4 and 5, the Head Constable and Police Constable respectively of Law and order , V Town Police Station , Vijayawada went to the library at 3. 15 p. m. along with the commissioner, the petitioner and his advocates, Sri. S. Rama Krishna and Sri. P. L. Narayana, entered the office room of the library. Respondent No. 1 is the librarian, Respondents No. 2 the Treasurer, and Respondents No. 3 the Secretary of the Building Construction Committee of the Library. The Advocate Commissioner in his report has stated that accompanied by the petitioner and his advocate Sri. P. L. Narayana he went to law and Order No. 5 Town Police Station , Vijayawada at about 2-30. p. m. and produce the letter for help. Taking the assistance the Respondents No. 4 and 5 he proceeded to the Library along with them and the plaintiffs counsel Sri. P. L. Narayana and reached there at about
( 3 ) P. m. They went to the 2nd floor where the office room is situated. In the office room of the Grandhalayam, the 1st respondent was found sitting in a chair before the desk. The Commissioner had shown the warrant to him and asked about the Respondent. Then the 1st Respondent called one Bujeti Jagannadha Rao and pretended to make enquiries about the respondents and ultimately he told the Commissioner that the respondent was not available. Thereupon the Commissioner drafter a notice intimating his intention to proceed with the commission work and asked him to co-operate and take the notice. The 1st respondent took the notice and endorsed the same and thereafter he asked the commissioner to wait for some time so that he may contact the President of the Grandhalayam, V. Jagan Mohan Rao and Treasurer by name P. Kesava Rao
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
