Asim Kumar Ray, J. - (1.) This is an application made under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. On obtaining leave under clause 12 of the Letters Patent, 1865 and under Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure petitioners instituted a suit being No. CS 331 of 2004 against the defendants therein praying inter alia for diverse reliefs as claimed in the plaint. In the said suit an interlocutory application was moved in which an order of injunction and appointment of a Special Officer to visit Sri Sri Iswar Satya Narayanji Temple, Moulmein were passed. On 17th January 2011 the suit was decreed. The Indian Ambassador in Myanmar was appointed Receiver in terms of the prayer of the plaint. The learned advocate on record of the petitioner communicated the judgment and decree immediately after the same was passed to the respondent/Indian Ambassador in Myanmar. Thereafter several communications were made by the learned advocate of the petitioners requiring respondent to implement the judgment and decree passed by the Court. Despite receipt of the said communication the respondent has failed and/or neglected to take any steps for compliance thereof and/or to administer the trust estate properties situated at Moulmein and Yangoon in the State of Myanmar. So the application for contempt.
(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has placed the petition and has invited the attention of the Court to the annexure to the said petition. He has contended that the respondent having knowledge of the judgment and decree passed by this Court refused and neglected to act as directed. So a rule be issued directing the respondent to show cause as to why the respondent should not be committed for Contempt of Courts and for other appropriate orders.
(3.) Perused the petition in details and its annexures as well as the report of the Special Officer and also gone through the supplementary affidavit and its annexures. Mr. Joy Saha ,learned advocate was appointed as the Special Officer. He had been to the Myanmar and visited the Indian High Commission at Myanmar. He has apprised one Mr. R.K.Singh and Mr. Verma of the office of Indian High Commission at Myanmar about the matter. During discussion Mr. Saha was advised that the matter should have been routed through the appropriate Ministry at New Delhi. Beside the judgment and decree dated 17th January,2011 another order was passed on 24-8-2011 certifying non-satisfaction of the decree. Relevant portion of the judgment and decree dated 17th January, 2011 reads as follows:- "The present Indian Ambassador in Myanmar is appointed Receiver in terms of claim (a) of the plaint as it is pointed out by the learned counsel Mr. Ray that the Ambassador will be the best person to implement the decree passed in this suit.;