- (1.) This appeal is directed against an order, dated April 10, 1974, of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Misc. Contempt Case No. 115 of 1973. It raises a question of law as to the jurisdiction and powers of a High Court to take action suo motu under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The material facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows : Raj NaRam alias Raja Sharma, Ram NaRam, Tapesh NaRam alias Trilok NaRam and Hari NaRam, respondents instituted Suit No. 89/168 under Section 209 of the U. P. Zamindari and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for ejectment of eleven defendants.
(2.) Issue No. 6 framed in the case was referred under Section 331A of the Act to the Revenue Officer, Sub-Divisional Office, for seeking declaration under Section 143 or 144 of that Act, with regard to the question as to whether the land in suit was abadi land before the consolidation and even thereafter. The Revenue Officer by his order, dated September 3, 1970, dismissed the suit. Aggrieved by the dismissal of their suit, the plaintiffs preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, Meerut, who, by his order dated April 29, 1972, allowed the appeal and decreed the suit with costs.
(3.) Against the decree of the Commissioner, the defendants preferred Revenue Second Appeal No. 226 (2) of 1971-72 before the Revenue Board. Along with the petition of appeal, they made an application for stay of the execution of the ejectment decree. The Board of Revenue passed an order on June 12, 1972, staying the execution of the decree. The opposite party therein, moved an application for vacation of the ex parte stay order. The application for vacation of stay order came up for hearing before the appellant, herein, in his capacity, as Member of the Revenue Board, on October 23, 1973. The respondent, Shri Vinay Chandra Misra appeared as a counsel in that Court on behalf of the appellant therein, to oppose the vacation of the stay order. What happened thereafter on that day, according to the allegations in the petition and affidavit, dated October 23, 1973, of Shri V. C. Misra, Advocate filed before the High Court. was as follows : "That on the said date the opposite party (appellant herein) heard the counsel of the parties in the case and was pleased to confirm the stay order. 6. That even after passing of the order aforesaid the counsel of (the respondent in that appeal) addressed the Court (opposite party) further and during the course of his arguments, the opposite party (appellant herein) scored the order and vacated the stay order and threw the file for getting the signatures of the parties affixed on the same. 7. That on this, the deponent (Shri V. N. (C- ) Misra) requested the opposite party to hear him and when he resisted, the opposite party got infuriated, lost his temper and abused the applicant and ordered the Court peon to throw the deponent physically out of the Court ........";