Orders refusing to take cognisance of civil contempt are not appealable under section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

JUDGMENT - Masodkar B.A., J.-These two appeals can be disposed of by common judgment. The first of it questions the order made by the learned Single Judge of this Court refusing to take cognisance with regard to the grievance that was made before the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Poona, in the proceedings in Civil Suit No. 93 of 1970 and the reference made thereupon by the Civil Court. The prayer was that the defendant has committed contempt of the Court and suitable action should be taken. After perusing the reference and hearing the parties, the learned Single Judge of this Court found that no case existed for taking cognisance and the proper course for the plaintiffs was, in fact, to object to the new construction and obtain necessary preventive order from the Court. Observing thus, the reference was rejected.

2. In the second matter, the learned Single Judge dismissed in limine the appellant's application complaining that contempt has been committed because there was wilful disobedience shown by the respondents to the order made by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Appeal from Order No. 842 of 1981.

3. It is not in dispute before us that both these matters are concerning “civil contempt”' within the contemplation of the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), which defines that category of contempt in section 2 (b) of the Act. Further, it is apparent that in both these matters by the orders under challenge this Court, acting by the learned Single Judge, refused to exercise the jurisdiction and take cognisance of the alleged contempt. “Civil contempt” has been defined as meaning wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ on other process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a Court.. The learned Single Judge did not findsufficient reason to consider the matters-as having been covered by the definition and, in fact, in the first matter the Court observed that the remedy of the complainant lay somewhere else.

4. When the first of the matters came up for hearing, the question of tenability of the appeals, as is provided by section 19 of the Act, also was raised for consideration and notices were issued to the State of Maharashtra as well as to the Advocate General of Maharashtra. In both the matters, Mrs. Shenoy, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, addressed us on behalf of the State as well as on behalf of the Advocate General.

5. After hearing the learned Counsel for both sides, we do not think that against such judgments or orders refusing to exercise jurisdiction and take cognisance upon the complaints concerning civil contempt, any appeal is provided or would lie, as of rignt, under section 19 of the Act. This is particularly so because of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of (Baradakanta v. Misra, C. J. Orissa H. C.)1, the ratio of which shows that the present type of question of ten-ability is no more res Integra. That judgment indeed clearly concludes the controversy.

6. As we have indicated above the character of the orders tinder appeal is such that this Court neither took cognisance of contempt nor made any order punishing any party for such contempt or made any other order of that character. No doubt in the decision rendered by the Supreme Court, the matter with which the Court was concerned was one of criminal contempt and with regard to that the eventual judgment was rendered. But that would hardly make any difference wish regard to the tenability of such appeals. It is indeed difficult to hold that on the ratio available in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the similar circumstances where the order under appeal does not take cognisance or the Court refuses to exercise the contempt jurisdiction in criminal contempt an appeal would not lie, while in the identical matter by reason that allegations were the one that would bring out civil contempt, an appeal is intended to be provided. The general p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document