9911796707
TMI Blog1951 (2) TMI 26X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dalat thought that the allegations in them made out an offence punishable Under Section 290, I. P. C. There was no quorum on 9-4 1950 the cases were adjourned to 23-4 1950. The opposite party No. 3, Kedar Nath is the Sarpanch of the Panchayati Adalat. On 12.4-1950, an article was published in a weekly paper known as Gramwasi, the gist of it is as follows : Kedar Nath, Sarpanch of Rampur Athiri has informed us that Sukhdeo has told all tenants who had become Bhumidars that he would issue receipts to them only on their paying full rent to him. He has not issued receipts to those who paid only part of the rent they are being pressed to pay the full rent. They are also being threatened that if they do not pay the full rent, they would be ejected from the land. In addition, Zamindars have stopped the tenants from taking wood; so the latter are finding great difficulty in constructing their houses. The district authorities should take immediate steps to remove this trouble of the Bhumidhars. [3] The Panchayati Adalat held proceedings in the cases on 23-4-1950 10-5-1960 convicted the appct. Under/Section 290, I. P. C. on 13-5-1950. The appct. filed an appln. in revn. a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve to follow certain rules of limitation. They have the power to issue summonses to witnesses to punish those. who disobey them. Section 83 permits them to receive such evidence in a suit, case or proceeding as the parties may adduce empowers them to call for such further evidence as they may consider necessary. It is their duty to ascertain the facts of every suit, case or proceeding by every lawful means in their power thereafter to make such decree or order as may seem to them just legal They have to follow the procedure prescribed by or under the Act not that of the Civil or Criminal P. C. They are not bound by the Indian Evidence Act. If there has been a miscarriage of justice or there is an apprehension of miscarriage of justice in any case, suit or proceeding pending before a Panchayati Adalat, the Sub-divisional Magistrate, the Munsif or the Sub-Divisional Officer respectively, is empowered by Section 85 to cancel the jurisdiction of the Panchayati Adalat with regard to the suit, case or proceeding, or quash any decree or order passed by it. Subject to this provision a decree or order of a Panchayati Adalat is final not to be questioned in any Ct; see Section 85 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , J. stated in Rex v. Davies(1906) 1 K. B. 32 : Courts or the Administration of justice exist for the benefit of the people, that for the benefit of the people, their independence must be protected from unauthorised interference, that the law provides effective means by which this end can be secured. In Parke's case he was found guilty of contempt of Ct. for publishing in his paper 'The Star' statements with respect to the past life of Dougal who was at that time under trial for an offence of forgery. The statements were unquestionably calculated to produce the impression that, apart from the charges then under enquiry, he was a man of bad desolute character. Davies also published in his paper certain articles reflecting upon the character antecedents of Henrietta Hunter, who was being prosecuted for abandonment. They were calculated to give an exceedingly unfavourable impression of the prisoner. Both the publications were held to tend to poison the stream of justice. Another case in which the publication of certain matter in a newspaper was found to amount to contempt of Ct. is the King v. Editor of the Daily Mail: Ex parte Farnsworth1921 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Section 239, U. P. T. Act is not made cognizable by a Panchayati. Adalat. It is not mentioned among the offences which are within its jurisdiction we were not refd. to any Govt. notfn. which might have-conferred jurisdiction upon a Panchayati Adalat to try such a case. The Panchayati Adalat itself did not purport to try the appct. Under Section 239, U. P. Tenancy Act, has not convicted him under it. It assumed the jurisdiction over the cases on the-supposition that the offence committed by the appct. is one punishable Under Section 290, I. P. C. which is one of the- sections mentioned in the Panchayat Raj Act. Section 290, I. P. C. punishes a person who commits public nuisance . Not issuing receipts to tenants can never amount to committing a public nuisance it was an erroneous view of the Panchayati Adalat that the complaints against the appct. made out an offence amounting to the commission of a public nuisance. Not only had the Panchayati Adalat absolutely no jurisdiction over the complaints but also it is beyond comprehension how any Panchayati Adalat could have ever thought that it had. Public nuisance is defined in Section 268, I. P. C. the definition so clearly ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t because its judgments orders would never come before this Ct. in appeal or revn. As I said earlier, no appeal is provided from a decision of a Panchayati Adalat at all. The only remedy of a person aggrieved by it is to apply in revn. to the Sub-divisional Mag., the Munsif or the Sub-divisional Officer as the case may be he has no further or additional remedy. Learned counsel for the appct. reld. upon Article 227, Const. Ind. as making a Panchayati Adalat judicially subordinate to this Ct. Under the article Every H. C. shall have superintendence over all Cts. tribunals ; without prejudice to the generality of that provision, the H. C. may call for returns, make issue general rules, prescribe forms settle tables of fees. We have to see as to what is the meaning of superintendence . The word has been borrowed from the English Law for the proper understanding of its meaning one would have to go through the history of English Law. [14] Disobedience to the King's writ was a contempt of the King from an early period the offender could be attached summarily. The power to imprison fine those guilty of contempt seems to have been originally used, firstly, to punish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the kingdom exercising a high transcendent authority, keeping all inferior jurisdictions within their due bounds removing their proceeding where it may be deemed necessary, to be determined by itself, or prohibiting their progress below. (Warren, p. 522). It also superintended all civil corporations, commanded Mags. others to do what their duty required in every case where there was no specific remedy protected the liberty of the subject by speedy summary interposition. Wills J. observed at p. 38 in Rex v. Davies that very great trust was reposed in the Ct. of King's Bench in respect of its control superintendence of all inferior Cts. that it was in a special manner the guardian protector of public justice throughout the kingdom. He repeated at p 43 that it was its peculiar function to exercise superintendence over the inferior Cts. confine them to their proper duties. In the words of Cockburn C. J, in The Queen v. Lefroy (1872) 8 Q. B. 134 the superior Cts were originally carved out of the one S. C., are all divisions of the aula regis, where it is said the King in person dispensed justice, their power of committing for contempt was an emanation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bihar Orissa in 1765 it took over the administration of the Civil Revenue justice in the territory established provincial Cts. in 1772. Appeals from these Cts. lay to the Sudder Dewany Adalat consisting of the Governor-General members of his Council. In 1773, a S. C. as a Ct. of Record was established in supersession of the Mayor's Ct. After the mutiny of 1857, the Govt. of India Act (21 22 vict. cap. 106) was enacted. All the Co.'s powers vested in the British Crown. The first Civil P. C. was enacted in 1859. In 1861 the Charter Act (24 25 vict. Cap. 104) was enacted; it established H. Cs. which received their Letters Patent. In 1862 the H. Cs._ superseded the old Sudder Dewany, Nizamat Adalat S. Cs. at Bombay, Madras Calcutta. Up to 1861 the Cts. had no statutory power of revn. over inferior Cts. Under Section 9, Charter Act, the H. Cs. were invested with jurisdiction all powers authority which were possessed by the abolished Cts. Section 15 laid down that each of the three H. Cs. established under the Act had superintendence over all Cts. which may be subject to its appellate jurisdiction had power to call for returns direct the transfer of any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndence, set aside a District Mag.'s order ostensibly passed Under Section 144, Cr. P. C. as ultra vires. In Tej Ram's case it was pointed out that the Sadar Diwani Adalat had no power to exercise judicial functions in any case in which its right of interference was not declared by any law that no power of revn. was conferred even by the Letters Patent; id was consequently held that a H. C. had no revisional power to interfere with or set aside judicial proceedings of a subordinate Ct. that Section 15, Charter Act, conferred administrative authority not judicial powers. But it was made clear that a H. C. was competent in the exercise of its power of superintendence to direct a subordinate Ct. to do its duty or to abstain from taking action in matters of which it had no cognisance, though it could not interfere set right orders on the ground that they proceeded on an error of law or fact. This case was relied upon, though not without some criticism, in Mohammad Sulaiman Khan's case. Edge C. J. did not limit the power of a H. C. to cases in which a subordinate Ct. had declined to hear or determine a suit or appln. within its jurisdiction preferred not to use the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ory provisions re (sic) appeal or revn. as a third kind of interference, that it was derived from English Law which did not recognise any revisional power conferred upon the King's Bench the power of superintendence to correct judgments of lower Cts. Their Lordships of the Judicial Committee decided in the case of Nilmoney Singh Deo that an unauthorised assumption of jurisdiction by a subordinate Ct. could be revised by the H. C. Under Section 15 of the Charter Act. It is clear from these authorities that the power of superintendence was not merely administrative included the power to interfere with judicial orders of subordinate Cts. though only in a limited manner, that is, only to check the assumption, or excess, of jurisdiction or to compel the exercise of jurisdiction wrongfully declined, not to substitute own judgment, whether on a question of fact or on a question of law, in place of the subordinate Ct's. [20] The Govt. of India Act of 1915 made no change in the powers of a H. C.; it recognised its power of superintendence over all Cts. subject to its appellate jurisdiction without any restriction. Sundar Nath v. Emperor 16 A. L. J. 189 Vedappan Servai v. Pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Kadhori's case, Walsh J. exercised his power of superintendence set aside, what he termed a perfectly childish order of a Munsif issuing notice to a litigant to show cause why he should not be committed for contempt of his Ct. by using objectionable language in an appln. for restoration of a suit. In Adya Saran Singh v. Jagannath 46 ALL. 323, a Dist. J. returned a memorandum of appeal on the ground that the appeal lay not in his Ct, but in that of the Comr.; the Tenancy Act provided no appeal from such an order this Ct., though it reld. on Mohammad Sulaiman Khan v. Fatima, refused to interfere with it in exercise of its power of superintendence, With great respect to the learned Judge, I think that Mohammad Sulaiman Khan v. Fatima, did not prevent his directing the Dist. J. to entertain hear the appeal, if he thought that he had jurisdiction which he had declined. Of course a H. C., in exercise of its power of superintendence, cannot correct a judicial order on the ground of a mistake even of law, which does not go to the root of the jurisdiction, but it does not mean that it cannot interfere with any judicial order at all. An order assuming jurisdiction where none exi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the judicial orders of the subordinate Cts. ; see The Lakshmi Iron Steel Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Radhey Lal Manni Lal 1938 A. L. J. 911. In Mulji Sicka Co. v. Municipal Commissioner of Bombay A. I. R. 1989 Bom. 471 it was recognised that the power of superintendence included the power to revise subordinate Ct.'s orders but pointed out that in view of Sub-section (2) of Section 224 a H. C. could not then revise a subordinate Ct.'s order under its power of superintendence. It was because of this restriction on the power to revise a subordinate Ct.'s order that the power of superintendence was interpreted to mean only administrative power. BOSE Sen JJ. observed in Balkrishna Narain v. Colonel N. S. Jatar A. I.R 1945 Nag. 33 : The H. C. possesses a general power of superintendence over the actions of Cts. subordinate to it. On its administrative fide the power is known as the power of superintendence. On the judicial side it is known as the duty of revn. This observation also is based on Sub-section (2) of Section 224. In Jahnabi's case G. N. Das J. said at p. 542 that the change made in Section 224 shows that the section is confined to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
