2011 (7) TMI 890 - AT - Central Excise

Why reference should not be made to the Hon ble High Court for necessary contempt proceedings for seeking adjournment on false grounds - the appellants were seeking adjournment on the grounds of ill health of their Counsel who has already withdrawn his vakalatnama clearly shows the act of the notices seeking adjournments on false ground with the malice intention and interference in the administration of the justice of this Tribunal - Registry is directed to forward the reference to the Hon ble High Court of Bombay

Summary

Issues: Contempt proceedings for seeking adjournment on false grounds

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Contempt proceedings for seeking adjournment on false grounds
The appellants were given an opportunity to explain why reference should not be made to the Hon'ble High Court for necessary contempt proceedings due to seeking adjournment on false grounds. The appellant, Shri Rafeeq Ahmed, stated in an affidavit that he was not aware of the facts mentioned in the reply of the company and signed the adjournment letter as there was no advocate available. The appellant Company explained that their advocate had withdrawn due to health reasons, leaving them unable to appoint another advocate. They sought adjournments on various dates due to their advocate's ill health and inability to return the necessary documents. The Tribunal considered these submissions but noted that seeking adjournments on false grounds when the advocate had already withdrawn his representation showed malice intention and interference in the administration of justice. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to refer the matter to the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay for contempt proceedings against the appellants. The show-cause notice was disposed of accordingly, and the Registry was directed to forward the reference to the High Court for further proceedings.

This judgment highlights the serious consequences of seeking adjournments on false grounds and interfering with the administration of justice. The Tribunal found the appellants' actions to be deliberate, especially considering their knowledge of the advocate's withdrawal. The decision to refer the matter to the High Court for contempt proceedings serves as a deterrent against such behavior in legal proceedings. It underscores the importance of honesty and transparency in court proceedings and the repercussions of attempting to manipulate the system through deceitful practices. The judgment emphasizes the need for parties to act in good faith and respect the integrity of the judicial process to maintain the credibility and effectiveness of the legal system.