TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 1660
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the impugned judgment dated 04.10.2024 has been rendered, and the said contempt petition being CP No. 02/7/HDB/2024 filed by the Appellant herein, has been dismissed and the Learned Adjudicating Authority has observed that owing to the fact and circumstances, which has been pleaded no apparent contempt is made out. Under the Companies Act, 2013, the power of the contempt has been specifically contained under Section 425 of the Companies Act, 2013, which reads as under: - "425. Power to punish for contempt - The Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal shall have the same jurisdiction, powers and authority in the respect of contempt of themselves as the High Court has and may exercise, for the purpose, the powers under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (70 of 1971), which shall have the effect subject to modifications that - (a) the reference therein to a High Court shall be construed as including a reference to the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal; and (b) the reference to Advocate-General in section 15 of the said Act shall be construed as a reference to such Law Officers as the Central Government may, specify in this behalf". On re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es the High Court that he intends to prefer an appeal, the High Court may also exercise all or any of the powers conferred by sub-section (2). (4) An appeal under sub-section (1) shall be filed- (a) in the case of an appeal to a Bench of the High Court, within thirty days; (b) in the case of an appeal to the Supreme Court, within sixty days, from the date of the order appealed against.". On a simple logical interpretation to the language used under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, as extracted above and owing to the consistent precedents laid down by various Hon'ble High Courts, as well as the Hon'ble Apex Court, no appeal under Section 19, would be maintainable as against the rejection of the contempt petition. In the case at hand, the contempt proceedings were drawn by filing of an application under Section 60(5) of the I & B Code, 2016, to be read with Section 425 of the Companies Act, 2013. This Tribunal feels it apt to observe that the provisions contained under Section 60(5) of the I & B Code, 2016, is only by way of a savings clause, which could be exercised for the purposes to meet out the exigency of the procedural law, which....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icularly when the statute itself provides for a remedial forum, to a person aggrieved against an action or an order passed in the proceedings. In the case at hand, the Appellant while filing the contempt petition, being Contempt Petition No. 02/7/HDB/2024, has alleged non-compliance of the order dated 02.08.2023. The alleged contemnor was impleaded as the Respondent / Opposite Party in the proceedings and was described as under: - "M/s. MCM Pacific Pte Limited, Regd Office: 911, Lorong 1, Toa Payoh, #25-01-Oleandder Towers, Singapore. Email: [email protected]". The opposite party which was described in the contempt petition the alleged contemnor is a juristic person which under the company law has got a right to sue and to be sued, but under the law for the purposes of the contempt proceedings to determine an Act of Contempt, it is always an act of an individual attached to the organisation, which could be brought within the purview of Section 425 to be read with Section 12/14 of the Contempt of Courts Act because organisation/juristic person cannot be punished under Section 12/14 of Contempt of Courts Act, and in the absence of the Respondent being repr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deration in fact, it was an act, which was supposed to be performed by the individual animate and not by an inanimate juristic person, if that be the situation then the contempt petition against an inanimate juristic person will not be tenable, until or unless the animate juristic person is representing the Respondent is made as the party to the proceedings of the contempt who could be punished under the Act, for non-compliance. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant has submitted, that the order dated 02.08.2023, of which the contempt was alleged was considered by the Tribunal, and the Tribunal by its wrongful interpretation while recording its perverse finding in para 37 to be read along with para 43 of the impugned judgment had dismissed the contempt petition holding thereof that no contempt is made out. Hence, the petition was dismissed. The judgment is alleged to have suffered from perversity. As far as the proceedings of the contempt are concerned, the Applicant or the Petitioner, who initiates the proceedings of contempt simply acts as an messenger/informer to the court or tribunal, whose order has been violated for taking of an appropriate action against the alleged co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is maintainable only against an order or decision of the High Court passed in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt, that is, an order imposing punishment for contempt. II. Neither an order declining to initiate proceedings for contempt, nor an order initiating proceedings for contempt nor an order dropping the proceedings for contempt nor an order acquitting or exonerating the contemnor, is appealable under Section 19 of the CC Act. In special circumstances, they may be open to challenge under Article 136 of the Constitution. III. In a proceeding for contempt, the High Court can decide whether any contempt of court has been committed, and if so, what should be the punishment and matters incidental thereto. In such a proceeding, it is not appropriate to adjudicate or decide any issue relating to the merits of the dispute between the parties. IV. Any direction issued or decision made by the High Court on the merits of a dispute between the parties, will not be in the exercise of "jurisdiction to punish for contempt" and, therefore, not appealable under Section 19 of the CC Act. The only exception is where such direction or decision is incide....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dealing in the instant Company Appeal. The exception, which has been relied upon by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant, particularly to the expression given to the word, "incidental "To or inextricably connected to other", is not a situation, which is prevalent herein or even relevant, for the reason being, that the order of which the contempt has been sought for was quite clear in its term, which contained a direction as it has been rendered by the Learned Tribunal on 02.08.2023, which exclusively pertains to the rights of the Successful Auction Purchaser, to get an assistance of the liquidator limited to, to work out the terms for determination of the rent for the use and occupation of the land. Thus, the said Judgment is of no relevance as far as nature of the instant dispute is concerned. The inferences drawn in para 11of the said Judgment of Midnapore Peoples' Coop. Bank Ltd. (Supra), cannot be exclusively read in the context of sub para IV and we cannot exempt to read sub-para 1 of para 11, which exclusively mentions that an appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act is maintainable only against an order or a decision of punishment of contempt, which is not the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Division Bench accepted this submission and observed that "in view of our understanding of the impugned judgment, as noted above, the learned Single Judge has not decided any dispute regarding the rights and obligations of the parties" other than adjudicating on the issue of contempt. The judgment of the Division Bench lost sight of the fact that whether the appeal was maintainable would have to be construed on a plain reading of the judgment of the Single Judge. Two aspects were covered by the judgment of the Single judge: Firstly, a finding that the appellants were guilty of contempt of the order dated 24 December 2019; and Secondly, that the respondent was entitled to promotion to the rank of IG. The first aspect is not amenable to an appeal under Section 19 at the present stage. The finding that the respondent was entitled to promotion to the rank of IG would be amenable to an appeal in terms of the law laid down by this Court in Midnapore Peoples' Coop. Bank Ltd. (supra), more particularly in paragraph 11(V) which has been extracted above". The aspect of sustainability of an appeal though in the said case under altogether a different context,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....irty days; (b) in the case of an appeal to the Supreme Court, within sixty days,from the date of the order appealed against." On a plain reading Section 19 provides that an appeal shall lie as of right from any order or decision of the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt. In other words, if the High Court passes an order in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish any person for contempt of court, then only an appeal shall be maintainable under subsection (1) of Section 19 of the Act. As sub-section (1) of Section 19 provides that an appeal shall lie as of right from any order, an impression is created that an appeal has been provided under the said sub-section against any order passed by the High Court while exercising the jurisdiction of contempt proceedings. The words "any order" has to be read with the expression 'decision' used in the said sub-section which the High Court passes in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt. "Any order" is not independent of the expression 'decision'. They have been put in an alternative form saying 'order' or 'decision'. In either case, it must be in the nature of punishment for contempt.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mpt from Article 215 of the Constitution. As has been noticed earlier, an appeal will lie under Section 19(1) of the Act only when the High Court makes an order or decision in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt. It is submitted on behalf of the respondent and, in our opinion rightly, that the High Court exercises its jurisdiction or power as conferred on it by Article 215 of the Constitution when it imposes a punishment for contempt. When the High Court does not impose any punishment on the alleged contemnor, the High Court does not exercise its jurisdiction or power to punish for contempt. The jurisdiction of the High Court is to punish. When no punishment is imposed by the High Court, it is difficult to say that the High Court has exercised its jurisdiction or power as conferred on it by Article 215 of the Constitution." No appeal is maintainable against an order dropping proceeding for contempt or refusing to initiate a proceeding for contempt is apparent not only from sub-section (1) of Section 19 but also from sub-section (2) of Section 19 which provides that pending any appeal the appellate court may order that- (a) the execution of the puni....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt. In this connection, it is pertinent to refer to the provision of Article 215 of the Constitution which provides that every High Court shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself. Article 215 confers on the High Court the power to punish for contempt of itself. In other words, the High Court derives its jurisdiction to punish for contempt from Article 215 of the Constitution. As has been noticed earlier, an appeal will lie under Section 19(1) of the Act only when the High Court makes an order or decision in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt. It is submitted on behalf of the respondent and, in our opinion rightly, that the High Court exercises its jurisdiction or power as conferred on it by Article 215 of the Constitution when it imposes a punishment for contempt. When the High Court does not impose any punishment on the alleged contemnor, the High Court does not exercise its jurisdiction or power to punish for contempt. The jurisdiction of the High Court is to punish. When no punishment is imposed by the High Court, it is difficu....