- (1.) THIS is an application made under Section 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act by the Official liquidator of the First National Bank Limited (in liquidation) against the respondent judgmentdebtor Dr. Kali Charan.
(2.) A decree for Rs. 387/s/9 was passed against the judgment-debtor respondent and warrant for attachment was issued by this Court dated 17th of January, 1958. Ram Lal bailiff of Ludhiana, c. W. I, went to effect attachment on 29th of January, 1959. On going to the shop of the respondent be demanded the decretal amount from him but he declined to pay. When the bailiff wanted to make an inventory of the goods for purposes of attachment, the judgment-debtor caught hold of his arm and pushed him out of the shop. The bailiff submitted a report to the sub-Judge to the above effect which is Exhibit C. W. I/i. In this report the bailiff also mentioned that the judgment-debtor being a political leader, no person was willing to attest the report. On this the Sub-Judge deputed Naib Nazir Panna Lal and two process-servers to accompany the bailiff. The bailiff along with the abovenamed persons then proceeded on 5th of February 1959, to the shop of the judgment-debtor. The respondent again refused to pay the decretal amount and told the bailiff that ho had entered into a compromise with the decree-holder and was paying the amount by instalments and that he had sent the amount of the last instalment by money order. A statement to the above effect was written down by the respondent and given to the bailiff. Towards the end of the statement he had requested that in view of the compromise, attachment be not effected. This statement is Exhibit R. 1. On the same sheet Panna Lal Naib Nazir made a report Exhibit g. W. 1/2, stating that the amount was demanded from the respondent but he had refused to pay and had stated that a compromise had been effected with the decree-holder. It was then said that the judgment-debtor had not allowed the attachment to be effected. It was also mentioned that he was a political leader of the Maha-Punjab Front and a number at his men had collected outside his shop and they ordered the Naib Nazir and the bailiff and others accompanying them to leave the shop and did not allow them to effect the attachment. It was also staled that nobody was prepared to bear witness to the report from among the persons assembled. But in order to help the respondent they were ready to obstruct them so as to prevent them from attaching the goods.
(3.) ON a notice being issued to the respondent to show cause why he should not be proceeded with for the alleged contempt of Court, the respondent filed a written statement, wherein he stated, that he did not want to contest the application against him; and that he was only pleading with the bailiff that he was paying the amount in accordance with what be considered to be a completed agreement, and that it appeared to be a case of misunderstanding. In the last part of the written-statement it was stated that he threw himself at the mercy of the Court and he never had the intention of committing any contempt and offered an unqualified apology for his behaviour.;