1996 (1) TMI 334 - DSC - Companies Law

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Maintainability of appeals under the Special Court Act.
2. Interpretation of Section 10 and Section 11A of the Special Court Act.
3. Jurisdiction of High Court versus Supreme Court for appeals under the Contempt of Courts Act.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Maintainability of Appeals under the Special Court Act:
The primary issue is whether appeals against orders of the Special Court, particularly those related to contempt, can be entertained by the High Court or if they must be directed to the Supreme Court. The respondent's counsel argued that appeals should directly lie to the Supreme Court as per Sections 10 and 13 of the Special Court Act. The appellant's counsel contended that Section 11A, which incorporates the Contempt of Courts Act, allows for appeals to the High Court.

2. Interpretation of Section 10 and Section 11A of the Special Court Act:
Section 10 of the Special Court Act explicitly states that appeals from any judgment, decree, sentence, or order of the Special Court shall lie to the Supreme Court, both on facts and on law. It includes a non obstante clause that overrides other laws. Section 11A, added later, grants the Special Court the same jurisdiction as a High Court in matters of contempt, referring to the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The appellant's counsel argued that this implies appeals should follow the same path as those from High Courts, i.e., to the Division Bench of the High Court.

3. Jurisdiction of High Court versus Supreme Court for Appeals under the Contempt of Courts Act:
The court concluded that the Special Court Act is a complete code, and Section 10 provides for appeals only to the Supreme Court. The incorporation of Section 11A does not alter the jurisdictional pathway established by Section 10. The Special Court, though composed of a sitting High Court judge, remains a distinct entity, and its orders, including those under the Contempt of Courts Act, are appealable only to the Supreme Court.

Conclusion:
The court held that the appeals cannot be entertained by the High Court and must be directed to the Supreme Court. The provisions of the Special Court Act, particularly Sections 10 and 13, clearly oust the jurisdiction of the High Court in these matters. The appeals were thus rejected as not maintainable.