Chinnappa Reddy, J. - (1.) The Advocate-General of Bihar is the appellant in this appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Respondent No. 1, M/s. Madhya Pradesh Khair Industries, represented by respondent Number 2, Om Prakash Agrawal were the highest bidders at an auction held by the Divisional Forest Officer, Garhwa South, of four forest coupes in the State of Bihar. Under the terms of the agreements the respondents were required to deposit 25% of each of the four bids as security. The respondents were, however, able to make the deposit in respect of one coupe only and not in respect of the other three coupes. The respondents requested for time. Thereafter, there was a long course of correspondence with which we are not now concerned. Finally, on January 28, 1970, the Conservator of Forests determined the agreements. On February 28, 1970, respondent No.1 served a notice on the Divisional Forest Officer, Garhwa South, intimating him that they had filed an application under Article 226 of the Constitution in the Calcutta High Court and that S. C. Deb, J., had been pleased to issue a rule nisi and also an injunction restraining the Govt. of Bihar and the officials of the forest Department of the Govt. of Bihar from giving effect to the proceedings by which the leases were determined and further directing them to allow M/s. Madhya Pradesh Khair Industries to carry on the work of cutting and felling of trees and removing the material in the said forest coupes. Alleging that the Officers of the Forest Department of the Govt. of Bihar had violated the order of injunction granted against them, the respondents filed an application to commit the Officers for Contempt of Court and in that application they prayed for and obtained an interim order directing the Officers not to interfere in any way with the activities of the respondents in removing the produce of the Khair trees. The State of Bihar preferred an appeal to a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court and on Sept. 29, 1970, the Division Bench passed an order allowing the appeal and directing the respondents to furnish security in a sum of Rs. 1,55,000/- if they desired to remove the forest produce. Otherwise, they were restrained from selling the trees and extracting the produce. The respondents offered certain property as security but that was rejected by the Registrar of the Calcutta High Court as the title was found to be defective.
(2.) At this stage, on January 8, 1971, the State of Bihar filed money suit No. 3 of 1971 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Palamau to recover a sum of Rs. 1,93,223/- as damages. The State of Bihar also filed an application under Order 38, Rule 5, Code of Civil Procedure and obtained an order of attachment of the 'Kath' manufactured by the respondents along with utensils, equipment, etc. The respondents were directed to furnish security in a sum of Rupees 2 lakhs and asked to show cause why the interim attachment should not be made absolute. The attachment was affected on January 10, 1971. the respondents appeared before the learned Subordinate Judge and requested that the amount of security may be reduced from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 75,000/-. The learned Subordinate Judge allowed the prayer of the respondents and reduced the amount of security from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 75,000/-. The State of Bihar preferred an appeal to the Patna High Court and an interim order was made by the High Court, staying the operation of the order of the learned Subordinate Judge but continuing the attachment. On March 29, 1971, after hearing both the parties, the Patna High Court made an order directing the respondents to furnish security of immovable property in a sum of Rs. 75,000/- and to deposit cash or furnish bank guarantee in a sum of Rs. 50,000/-. It was directed that on such security being furnished the interim attachment would cease and the respondents would be allowed to remove the stock, utensils and equipment.
(3.) Without complying with the order of the Patna High Court, Respondent No. 1 then moved the learned single Judge of the Calcutta High Court on April 21, 1971, and obtained an order restraining the State of Bihar from continuing the money suit in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Palamau and further directing the State to take steps to get the attachment vacated if security was furnished by the respondents as directed by the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court. The State of Bihar filed an appeal against the order of the learned single Judge and the operation of the order was stayed by an order of January 10, 1972 of the Division Bench. It was directed that the proceedings in the money suit in the Court of the learned Subordinate Judge of Palamau should proceed. In the meanwhile on July 30, 1971, respondent No. 1 moved another application before the learned single Judge of the Calcutta High Court offering to deposit Rs. 60,000/- in cash and requesting that on such deposit being made, they might be allowed to remove the stock. This application was allowed on July 30, 1971, by the learned single Judge and the amount was directed to be deposited with the counsel for the State of Bihar. The order was later on modified on December 16, 1972, and the amount was directed to be deposited with the Registrar of the High Court.;