Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
R. A. SHARMA, ALOKE CHAKRABARTI
SHEO CHARAN - Appellant
Versus
NAWAL - Respondents
S. A. 192 Of 1997
Decided On : 05/23/1997
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT - APPEAL - MAINTAINABILITY - APPEAL UNDER RULE 5 OF CHAPTER VIII OF THE HIGH COURT RULES NOT MAINTAINABLE AGAINST DECISION OF SINGLE JUDGE DISMISSING CONTEMPT PETITION - ACT PROVIDES FOR APPEAL FROM SUCH DECISION UNDER SECTION 19 - ORDINARY RIGHT OF APPEAL TAKEN AWAY BY STATUTE.
Fact of the Case:
Appellant filed a contempt petition under the Contempt of Courts Act, which was dismissed by the single Judge. The appellant challenged the dismissal order by filing an appeal under Rule 5 of Chapter VIII of the High Court Rules.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the appeal under Rule 5 of Chapter VIII of the High Court Rules was not maintainable. The Court reasoned that the Contempt of Courts Act itself provides for an appeal from the decision of a single Judge under Section 19, and therefore, the ordinary right of appeal under the Rules was taken away by the statute.
Issues: Whether an appeal under Rule 5 of Chapter VIII of the High Court Rules is maintainable against the decision of a single Judge dismissing a contempt petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court relied on the following principles: * When a statute confers jurisdiction on a Court, it imports the ordinary incidents of the procedure of that Court, including the right of appeal from its decision. * However, this rule does not apply if the statute, which has conferred the jurisdiction, itself lays down the procedure and provides for an appeal from the decision of such Court. * In such a case, the ordinary/general right of appeal from the decision of the Court stands taken away/excluded by the statute. * The Contempt of Courts Act provides for an appeal from the decision of a single Judge under Section 19. Therefore, the ordinary right of appeal under the Rules was taken away by the statute.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the appeal as not maintainable.
R. A. SHARMA, J.
( 1 ) APPELLANT filed a contempt petition under the Contempt of Courts Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), which has been dismissed and the notices issued to the opposite parties have been discharged by the learned single Judge. The order passed by the learned single Judge is reproduced below :"sri Yogesh Agarwal for the applicant and Sri Janardan Sahai for the opp. parties are present. This proceedings under the Contempt of Court Act has been initiated for the alleged disobedience of the order dated 25-11-1992, which reads as under : "issue notice. Until further order of this Court, if the petitioner is in possession, he will not be dispossessed in pursuance of the impugned orders dated 30-1-90 and 31-7-92 passed by respondent No. 1". It is admitted by the learned counsel for both the parties that on the date on which this order was passed only the consolidation authorities were the parties to the writ petition and the non applicant Nos. 1 to 10 were impleaded later on. Therefore, it is obvious that the order was intended to prevent the consolidation authorities to hand over possession of the plots, in question, in pursuance of the orders dated 30-11-90 and 31-7-92. It is urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even those persons who were not arrayed as parties are expected to honour the order and they can be held guilty of contempt of court. It is not necessary to examine this contention. In a fit case, the court may proceed against the persons who were not parties. In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, this court is not inclined to take action against the persons who were not arrayed as parties at the time when the order was passed. In this view of the matter, the application for contempt is dismissed and the notices issued to the opposite parties are discharged. "being aggrieved, the appellant has filed this appeal.
( 2 ) THE Act has made provision for appeal in Section 19, which is reproduced below :"19. Appeals.- (1) An appeal shall lie as of right from any order or decision of High Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt - (a) Where the order or decision is that of a single Judge, to a Bench of not less than two Judges of the Court; (b) where the order or decision is that of a Bench, to the Supreme Court; Provided that where the order or decision is that of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner in any Union territory, such appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court. (2) Pending any appeal, the appellate Court may order that - (a) the execution of the punishment or order appealed against be suspended; (b) if the appellant is in confinement, he be released on bail; and (c) the appeal be heard notwithstanding that the appellant has not purged his contempt. (3) Where any person aggrieved by any order against which an appeal may be filed satisfies the High Court that he intends to prefer an appeal, the High Court may also exercise all or any of the powers conferred by Sub-Section (2 ). (4) An appeal under Sub-Sec. (1) shall be filed - (a) in the case of an appeal to a Bench of the High Court within thirty days; (b) in the case of an appeal to the Supreme Court, within sixty days, from the date of the order appealed against. "
( 3 ) UNDER S. 19 appeal lies against the decision/order by which punishment for contempt has been imposed. In this connection reference may be made to State of Maharashtra v. Mahboob S. Allibhoy, (1996) 4 SCC 411 : (AIR 1996 SC 2131), wherein the Supreme Court has laid down as follows (at page 2132 (of AIR)) :"on a plain reading S. 19 provides that an appeal shall lie as of right from any order or decision of the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt. In other words, if the High Court passes an order in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish any person for contempt of court, then only an appeal shall be maintainable under Sub-Section (1) of Section 19 of the Act. As Sub-Section (1) of Section 19 pr
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
