HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
S. P. Mohapatra And S. Barman, JJ.
SWARNAMAYI PANIGRAHI - Appellant
Versus
B. NAYAK - Respondent
O. J. C. 190 Of 1955
Decided On : OCTOBER 10, 1958
CONTEMPT OF COURT - Transfer Petition - Allegations against Judge - Justification - Apology - Punishment. Madras Estates Land Act (I of 1908).
Fact of the Case:
The contemners, Shri Brundaban Nayak, Shri Balakrishna Rath, Advocate, and Shri N. M. Patnaik, Pleader, were charged with contempt of court for making unfounded and derogatory statements in transfer petitions filed before the Additional District Collector, Ganjam-Chatrapur, against the Rent Suit Collector, Berhampur. The statements alleged that the Rent Suit Collector was partial to the landlord, Srimati Swarnamayi Panigrahi, and that the conclusions of the case were foregone due to her husband's position as Chief Justice of Orissa High Court.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the contemners had exceeded the limits of their right permissible under law in filing the transfer petitions and that such excess amounted to contempt of court. The Court also found that the apology purported to be offered by Shri Nayak was not sincere and was a mere pretense. The Court further found that the lawyers, Shri Rath and Shri Patnaik, had abetted Shri Nayak in making the said statements and that they were also guilty of contempt of court.
Issues: 1. Whether Shri Nayak exceeded the limits of his right permissible under law in filing the transfer petitions in question. 2. Whether or not such excess amounted to contempt of Court. 3. Effect of apology, in the manner and background it was purported to be offered. 4. Whether the said Advocate and Pleader abetted Shri Nayak in making the said statements in the transfer petitions alleged to have been unfounded and derogatory in the manner fully stated in the show cause notice dated March 5, 1956. 5. Effect of apology as offered. 6. If contempt, what should be appropriate punishment.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that Shri Nayak had exceeded the limits of his right permissible under law in filing the transfer petitions and that such excess amounted to contempt of court. The Court reasoned that Shri Nayak's allegations against the Rent Suit Collector were baseless and reckless, and that he had not exhausted all available remedies before resorting to the transfer petitions. 2. The Court held that the apology purported to be offered by Shri Nayak was not sincere and was a mere pretense. The Court reasoned that Shri Nayak had not expressed any remorse for his actions and that he had continued to justify his statements even after the Court had found them to be contemptuous. 3. The Court held that the lawyers, Shri Rath and Shri Patnaik, had abetted Shri Nayak in making the said statements and that they were also guilty of contempt of court. The Court reasoned that the lawyers had a duty to advise Shri Nayak against making such statements and that they had failed to do so. 4. The Court held that the appropriate punishment for the contemners was a fine. The Court reasoned that the contemners' actions were serious, but that they were not so serious as to warrant imprisonment.
Final Decision: The Court directed Shri Brundaban Naik to pay a fine of Rs. 300/-, and Shri Balakrishna Rath, Advocate, and Shri N. M. Patnaik, Pleader, to pay a fine of Rs. 150 each.
S. BARMAN, J.
( 1 ) THE genesis of these contempt proceedings before us was an ordinary rent dispute between a landlord and a tenant in respect of certain lands in a certain village in an Inam estate at Berhampur in the district of Ganjam, primarily governed by the Madras Estates Land Act (Act I of 1908 ). The original Crl. Misc. Case No. 6 of 1955 relates to contempt proceedings. The connected writ petition being O. J. C. No. 190 of 1955, posted for hearing analogously with the said contempt matter, has since become infructuous and was not pressed and is therefore dismissed.
( 2 ) THE alleged contemners are one Shri Brundaban Nayak described in the records herein as betel-leaves merchant, near Railway Station, Berhampur (Ganjam) (hereinafter referred to as Shri Nayak) and Shri Balakrishna Rath, Advocate berhampur (hereinafter referred to as Shri Rath) and Shri N. M. Patnaik, Pleader, berhampur (hereinafter referred to as Shri Patnaik ).
( 3 ) THE charges against Shri Nayak were these: On May 19, 1955 Shri Nayak had filed before the Additional District Collector, Ganjam-Chatrapur, two transfer petitions, namely, M. Cs. Nos. 2 and 3 of 1955 and made some prejudicial statements to wit: "1. The lower court openly identified himself with the plaintiff Srimati swarnamayi Panigrahi and is so partial to her that no justice or impartial decision can be expected from him. 2. He has gone out of the course prescribed by law and has taken over the function of witness and court in himself in such a way that there is no parallel to it in the history of litigation in India; and 3. That the opposite party wields extraordinary influences in the State as she is the wife of Shri Lingaraj Panigrahi, Chief Justice of Orissa High court. It is being openly talked about that the conclusions are foregone. " on these statements, the charge against Shri Nayak was that they were calculated to undermine the prestige and dignity of the trial Court. The charge against the said Advocate Shri Rath and the pleader Shri Patnaik were that they ". . . . . . abetted Shri Brundaban Nayak aforesaid in making such unfounded and derogatory statements by accepting Vakalat on his behalf and filing the said petitions before the Addl. Collector, Chatrapur, on his behalf. " the charge against all the three alleged contemners was that such action amounted to contempt of the Court of the Suits Collector, Berhampur. Although the charge did not specifically allege contempt of the High Court, the learned counsel for the alleged contemners, in course of hearing before us, submitted that, if the offending passage in the transfer petitions could be construed as amounting to contempt of the High Court also --his arguments covered both in respect of alleged contempt of the lower court as also of the High Court.
( 4 ) THE main points for consideration in this matter are : a Re : Shri Nayak.
(i) Whether Shri Nayak exceeded the limits of his right permissible under law in the matter of filing the transfer petitions in question. (ii) 16 so, whether or not such excess amounted to contempt of Court. (iii) Effect of apology, in the manner and background it was purported to be offered. B. Re: Shri Rath, Advocate and Shri Patnaik, Pleader. (i) Whether the said Advocate and Pleader abetted Shri Nayak in making the said statements in the transfer petitions alleged to have been unfounded and derogatory in the manner fully stated in the show cause notice dated March 5, 1956. (ii) Effect of apology as offered. C. Re : Punishment. If contempt, what should be appropriate punishment.
( 5 ) FOR determination of these questions, both sides relied on the background of the picture giving colour to it in their respective way. What happened was this:
( 6 ) AT all material times one Shrimati Swarnamayi Panigrahi (herein after referred to as the landlord) was the owner and proprietor of the village known as baidyanathpur alias Kampalli situated within the Municipality of Berhampur (Ganjam) and Shri Nay
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.