( 1 ) THIS Rule was issued calling upon the opposite parties to, show cause why they should not be committed to prison for contempt of Court. The facts are not in dispute and have to be taken as stated in the petition since the opposite parties have not denied them by any affidavit.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is the tenant of a shop room in Lindsay Street, Calcutta. He had sublet two window spaces in this room to the opposite party No. 1. It is not clear whether any room space was included in the sub-tenancy but that does not affect the question to be decided. The petitioner had started ejectment proceedings against the opposite party No. 1 in the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta, in respect of the demised spaces. These proceedings had eventually been brought over to this Court in its revisional jurisdiction and finally terminated in favour of the petitioner by an order made by Roxburgh J. on April 10, 195. 1. That order was in these terms: "the bailiff of the Court to give possession of the property to the applicant on July 2, 1951. "

( 3 ) THIS order was duly put in execution by the petitioner and on July 2, 1951, the bailiff of the Court of Small Causes put the petitioner