PERERA v. PERERA.

C. R., Kalutara, 4,400.

Contempt of Court-Resistance to execution of decree under Small Tenements Ordinance-Jurisdiction of Court of Requests-Procedure-False statement in affidavit of Fiscal's officer-False return by Deputy Fiscal-Courts Ordinance, No. 1 of 1889, s. 59-Civil Procedure Code, ss. 325, 372, 795 and 800.

The only jurisdiction which a Court of Requests has, in the matters of contempt, is that conferred by section 59 of The Courts Ordinance (No. 1 of 1889), which enacts that " every District Court, Court of Requests, and Police Court shall, for the purpose of maintaining its proper authority and efficiency, have a special jurisdiction to take cognizance of, and to punish by the procedure and with the penalties in that behalf by law provided, every offence of contempt of Court committed in the presence of the Court itself and all offences which are committed in the course of any act or proceeding in the said Courts respectively, and which are declared by any law for the time being in force to be punishable as contempt of Court."

Where the Commissioner of a Court of Requests convicted the defendant in a proceed