B.C. Chakrabarti, J. - (1.) This is an application under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for criminal contempt on the allegations of violation of Court's order and thereby interfering with and/or obstructing administration of justice tending to lower the authority of the Court.
(2.) The case of the petitioners is as follows:- The tank fishery recorded in Khatian No. 638 of Mouza Dhapamanpur (popularly known as Gomukhpota fishery belongs to the petitioners in absolute right on the basis of their purchase by a registered deed dated March 6, 1963 from the then owner in possession Sm. Monoraraa Das Chowdhury who in her turn got the said properly by virtue of a deed of gift dated October 1, 1962. Since purchase the petitioners as joint owners have been in actual physical possession of the said fishery and their names were duly mutated in, the revenue records of the mouza While in possession, the petitioners were served with a notice issued by the State of West Bengal in the name of the previous owner claiming that the fishery had vested in the State, Against the said order the petitioner moved an application under Article 226 of the Constitution and obtained a Rule and interim order of injunction restraining the State of West Bengal and its officers from interfering with the possession of the petitioners. Eventually the Rule was disposed of with the direction that the Revenue Authorities would not give effect to the order to be passed by the Revenue Officer or interfere with the possession of the petitioners for a period of 3 weeks after disposal of the proceeding by the Revenue Officer. After the Revenue Officer disposed of the said proceeding pending before him against the petitioners, the petitioners again moved this Hon'ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution against the said order and again obtained a Rule and interim order of injunction. The said Rule is still pending and the interim order is still in force.
(3.) The respondent is the son of a Darwan of 'Sarkar Estate" of Beliaghata of which the petitioners are co-sharers. The respondent has no concern with the fishery and has no manner of right, title or interest over the same.With a view to cause mischief to the petitioners and for making wrongful gain to himself respondent moved an application under Section 144 Cr.P.C before the Court of the Executive Magistrate, Barrackpur and by fraudulent misrepresentation and without impleading the petitioners obtained an ex parte order on July 18, 1981. On coming to know of the said proceeding the petitioner moved this Hon'ble Court and obtained a Rule and ad interim order of stay of operation of the impugned order passed by the Executive Magistrate. In the meantime the respondent filed a suit being Title Suit No. 94 of 1981 in the Second Court of subordinate Judge at Alipore making false representation and allegations against the petitioners. The respondent prayed for injunction in the said suit which was refused Being thus baffled in his attempts, the respondent started interfering with the possession of the petitioners. The respondent with his agents and associates suddenly came to the fishery on September 20, 1981 with the object of ousting the petitioners from the fishery. As the Police Authorities failed to take any steps in spite of the matter being reported to them, the petitioners moved a writ application against the State of West Bengal, Superintendent of Police Additional Superintendent of Police, Officer in-Charge of the Police Station and the respondent and his associates with the prayer for issue of a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents nos. 2 to 4 therein to act and proceed in accordance with law. The petitioners obtained a Rule and an Interim order, the Rule being still pending. In spite of all these facts the respondent with his agents and associates again made attempts on January 23, 1982 to dispossess the petitioners and take forcible possession of the fishery. There being continuous attempt to dispossess the petitioners, they were obliged to file a suit being Title Suit No. 34 of 1982 in the Second Court of the Subordinate Judge at Alipore against the respondent for a declaration of their title to the said fishery and for permanent injunction. The petitioners also filed an application for ad interim injunction restraining the respondent therein from disturbing the possession of the petitioners in the said fishery. The learned Subordinate Judge passed the following order on 22 2.1982. "Plaintiff files a petition under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. and/or with Section 151 CPC praying for an order granting temporary injunction restraining the defendant, his men, agents and associates from interfering and/or disturbing the possession of the suit fishery described in the schedule till the disposal of this suit and also prays for an order of ad interim injunction to the same effect till the disposal of this petition. Heard lawyer for the plaintiff at length perused the petition. Defendant to show cause within 7 days from the service of the notice as to why the plaintiff's prayer for temporary injunction shall not be granted. Plaintiff's prayer for issuing the order of ad interim injunction is reconsidered and allowed. Defendants are hereby restrained from entering, interfering and/or disturbing the possession of the plaintiff of the suit descried in the schedule to this petition till disposal of the petition under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. Urgent requisite at once";