TMI Blog1974 (7) TMI 128X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r and his successor M.L. Sharma arrived in Aligarh to take over charge. The handing over of the charge by the Agent takes many weeks S.D. Nayar permitted M.L. Sharma to occupy two of the rooms of this building. Another room was in the occupation of the son of the previous Agent and a Kothari in the occupation of the driver. Bargad Masih, M.L. Sharma arrived in Aligarh in the middle of January 1972 and the handing over of the charge was complete on the 19th of February, 1972. On that date, S.D Nayar sent his luggage by truck to Delhi. There exists controversy as to whether the whole of the luggage had been sent or only a part and also whether S.D. Nayar continued to occupy the building after this date There is, however, no controversy in that S.D. Nayar occupied the building as a tenant upto 19-2-1972 and the other persons, referred to above, were living in a few rooms or a Kothari as licencees with the permission of S.D. Nayar. 3. To avoid repetition and to give facts in the correct perspective it may here be mentioned that in the sale deed executed in favour of the applicants the house was shown to be in the tenancy of the State Bank of India. The case of the petitioners, on the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the portion of the building in their occupation, i.e., the Jerao Building less the two rooms and a Kothari. The injunction was served on both the defendants by refusal through an advocate Commissioner, who also submitted his report that the applicants were, in fact, occupying the portion of the building as alleged by them. 6. On 21-2-1972 at about 7 or 8. P. M. the local police visited the building and took into custody the applicants and other ladies, who were released on bail, it is said, on the intervention of an advocate. 7. The applicants' case further is that the injunction order was also communicated to the defendants of the suit and also to the Superintendent of Police, District Magistrate, Additional District Magistrate and Deputy Superintendent of Police (City) by telegrams despatched the same day. 8. The same day at about midnight police party consisting of Bulaka Singh. C.O. City (I), G.K. Shukla, C.O. City (II), A. Koriyan, Assistant Superintendent of Police, S.I.H.P. Dhavan and others visited the house again at 12 or 12.30 A. M. The applicants' case is that their servants were in the house and the police took them into custody, threw away the luggage and thus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts to restore possession to the applicants and to decide the release application forthwith. Prayer was also made to direct the respondents not to proceed in an illegal manner and to take action in accordance with law. 12. Before making comments on merits we shall like to make it clear that we are making observations on the basis of the affidavits and material which have been brought on the record. The material produced before us may not be complete and the parties may during the hearing of the civil suit or of the release application bring other material before the court or the authority. Consequently, the observations made in this order should not be regarded as binding on the parties and all the points can be registered and it shall be necessary for the Civil Court or the prescribed Authority to decide the matter afresh taking into consideration all the material which may be brought to its notice. In brief, the observations are being made for the disposal of the present proceedings and not to finally adjudicate on the title and the rights of the parties. 13. It is not in dispute that after the incident of the 21st of February, 1972, the applicants were no longer in possession of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e in Delhi in which Nayar himself stayed on his transfer to Delhi. After having finally handed over charge on the 19th February and having taken his luggage in a truck there could be no question of his coming back to Aligarh to live in the house. It appears to us that whatever the conduct of S.D. Nayar might have been before leaving Aligarh, he felt that he must come to the help of M.L. Sharma otherwise the bona fide of his conduct may be in question and he took up the plea that a part of the luggage had remained in the building and he still continued to be in occupation thereof. We would have avoided making these observations had they not been material in determining whether there has or has not been wilful disobedience of the injunction order on the part of the successor Agent M.L. Sharma. 18. It is not in dispute that the injunction order was shown to Bulaka Singh, C.O. City, I, when the police party visited the building on the midnight of 21-2-1972. Ordinarily, the injunction order would also have come to the notice of the other police officers. The men of the applicants would not have kept the order a secret and would have without fail relied upon the court's order to cont ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... indicate that whatever. S.D. Nayar did after being called to Aligarh from Delhi was at the instance and for the benefit of M.L. Sharma. In that event M.L. Sharma maneuvered to take possession through S.D. Nayar and he would still be guilty of breach of the order of injunction. 20. It is true that these persons had disregarded the court's order and thus committed civil contempt, yet the circumstances of the present case are not such as to justify awarding any punishment When in the sale-deed it was mentioned that the building was in the tenancy of the State Bank of India, the applicants should have realised that the tenancy was not in a personal capacity but was for the State Bank of India or for the Agent of the State Bank and, therefore, there could be no vacancy of the accommodation on one Agent being transferred from the station. The District Magistrate has not been shown to have ever passed any allotment order in respect of this building and the building in view of the recitals in the sale deed prima facie appears to have been in the tenancy of the State Bank of India. The exact date from which it has been in tenancy has not come on the record. In the counter-affidavit of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AIR 1963 Raj 3. 23. As already mentioned above, total evidence as to tenancy and the taking of possession by the applicants has not come on the record of the civil suit. It shall be proper to remand the injunction matter for a fresh consideration so that no one may gain as a result of his improper action, neither the applicants nor M.L. Sharma. 24. In view of the above findings no direction can be given in the writ Petition No. 3243 of 1972 except for expediting the release application already moved before the District Magistrate, all the more when the F. A. F. O. and the Civil Revision are being reminded for a fresh hearing after recording evidence of the parties. 25. Coming now to Special Appeal No. 688 of 1972 it would be seen that Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act prescribes a limitation for taking cognizance of contempt. This Section 20 provides:-- No court will initiate any proceedings for contempt, either on its own motion or otherwise, after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed. This section lays stress upon the initiation of the proceedings by the court and not to proceedings for contempt being tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
