SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1898 Supreme(Cal) 86

Kali Narain Roy Chaudhuri, Plaintiff No. 2 – Appellant
Versus
Shaikh Bajoo – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Maclean, C.J. - This is a rule to show cause why an order made by the Munsif and confirmed on appeal by the District Judge inflicting a fine of 500 rupees on the Applicant, should not be set aside The fine, the maximum allowed, was imposed under sec. 174 of the Code Sec. 174 of the CPC is a section of a highly penal nature, and in my judgment its provisions, in order to give validity to anything purporting to be done under them, must be strictly complied with. Sec. 174 is as follows :--

If any person on whom a summons to give evidence or produce a document has been served fails to comply with the summons, or if any person so summoned and attending departs in contravention of sec. 173, the Court may order him to be arrested and brought before the Court.

Provided that no such order shall be made when the Court has reason to believe that the person so failing had a lawful excuse for such failure.

When any person so brought before the Court fails to satisfy it that he had a lawful excuse for not complying with the summons, the Court may sentence him to a fine not exceeding five hundred rupees.

If any person so apprehended and brought before the Court cannot, owing to the absence of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top