Allahabad High Court
Ramji Lal Sharma vs Civil Judge, Allahabad And Ors. on 9 November, 1987
Equivalent citations: AIR1988ALL143, AIR 1988 ALLAHABAD 143, (1988) 21 REPORTS 472, (1988) 2 ALL RENT CAS 225, (1988) ALL WC 194
ORDER D.S. Sinha, J.
1. This case came up before me on 24th Aug., 1987. On that day an application on behalf and under the signatures of Shri R. L. Sharma, praying the case to be listed after 13-9-1987 was moved. According to the statement made in para 1 of the application, the cases of Shri Sharma had been adjourned for the period between 13-8-1987 and 13-9-1987 under the orders of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice on account of the fact Shri Sharma had been allegedly suffering from "Chronic and acute diarrhoea". For the reasons stated in the order dt. 24-8-1987 the said application was rejected and the case was directed to be put upon 26th Aug.,1987.
On 26th Aug., 1987, Shri Sharma appeared and prayed for some time to enable him to file rejoinder affidavit. The learned counsel for the opposite parties did not oppose the prayer. Shri R. L. Sharma and the learned counsel for the opposite parties jointly agreed that the case be taken up on 28th Aug., 1987 as a first case peremptorily. The case was directed to be listed accordingly. However, the case came on 1-9-1987.
2. On 1st Sept., 1987 Shri Sharma, instead of proceeding with the case, moved an application with the following prayer :
"It is, therefore, prayed that the rejoinder-affidavit be placed on record and the aforesaid case be ordered to be listed before some other Bench after my adjournment, so as to serve the ends of justice."
The first ground in support of this prayer is stated in para 1 of the application which reads thus : --
. That the applicant has filed a Civil Misc. Contempt Application No. of 1987, which is pending in the Hon'ble Court for disposal and some date has been fixed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice B. N. Misra for the hearing along with the records of the aforesaid case."
The second ground is traceable in para 3 of the application which is inability of Shri Sharma to argue the case "due to..... extremely ill health and ......... suffering from acute diarrhoea." The learned counsel for the opposite parties prayed for and was granted a week's time to file objection in answer to the application and the application was directed tobe listed on 9th Sept., 1987. The case, however, did not come on 9-9-1987, presumably, on account of the fact that I have been sitting in a Division Court and not alone.
3. Now the matter is up before me today again. An objection dt. 8-9-1987 on behalf of the opposite parties, in answer to the application of Shri Sharma dt. 1-9-1987, has been filed today. It isbeing placed on record. In para 2 of their objection the opposite parties assert that they hold in their favour a decree of ejectment of Shri Sharma from their house situate at Bund Road, Allahabad, besides the decree for recovery of rent and damages etc. and the decree is in the final stage of execution. They further assert that the judgment-debtor Shri Sharma has not paid either the decretal amount or damages for the useand occupation of theirhouseand is "resorting to every conceivable tactics to delay and frustrate" their efforts "to get the benefit of the decree passed in their favour." Para 3 of the objection contains averments to the effect that on 13-8-1987 when Hon'ble A. N. Dikshita, J. before whom this case was listed on that day, proceeded to hear the matter Shri Sharma stated that "since the petitioner had filed a contempt application against Mr. Justice A. N.Dikshita the Hon'ble Judge would be biased against him and he could not expect justice from his (Hon'ble Mr. Justice A. N. Dikshita's) Court." Hon'ble Mr. Justice A. N. Dikshita, ordered the case to be listed before another Bench. Thereupon the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice, on 20-8-1987, directed this case to be listed before me as is borne out from the order-sheet of the case.
4. When the case came up before me on 24-8-1987 an unsuccessful attempt by and on behalf of Shri Sharma was made to get hearing of the case adjourned fora long time. Having failed to achieve the desired goal, itappears, Shri Sharma filed some contempt application against me which, according to the statement made in para 15 of the objection of the opposite parties, has been dismissed on 3-9-1987 by Hon'ble B. N. Misra, J.
5. On case being taken up today Shri R.L. Sharma, the petitioner in the case, exclaimed that he was not confident to get justice from me and made a prayer for adjournment of the case for half an hour to enable him to file some application. The prayer was granted in spite of the objection raised by the learned counsel for the opposite parties. After half an hour when the case was taken up again Sri R. L. Sharma moved an application. This application, which is not supported by any affidavit, contains following prayer: --
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court be gtaciously pleased to release the aforesaid case and the same be ordered to be listed before some other Bench after my adjournment, i.e. after 24-12-1987, so as to serve the ends of justice."
The above prayer is, basically, founded on the averments made in paras 1, 4 and 5 and it would be appropriate to reproduce them below :
"1. That on 13-8-1987 Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Dikshit of the Hon'ble Court released the aforesaid case, simply because 1 appeared as a counsel in a Contempt case filed against him on 18-6-1987."
"4. That I thereafter filed a Civil Misc. Contempt Application No. of 1987 against Hon'ble Mr. Justice D. S. Sinha on 27-8-1987, which also I, could not argue so far due to my illness."
"5. That under the circumstances, it is expedient in the interest of justice that the aforesaid case be released and ordered to be listed before some other Bench, after my adjournment, as I have moved further adjournment applications before Hon'ble the Chief Justice till 24-12-1987, as I am unable to argue the cases due to my extreme ill health and as 1 am suffering from acute diarrhoea and thus there is no question of my arguing the aforesaid case on merits."
6. The averments in para 1 of the application, it appears, have been made by way of citation of precedent for release of the case otherwise they have, obviously, no relevance for grant of the prayer of Sri Sharma for release and adjournment of the case made before me today.
7. Contents of para 4 of the application also do not afford to Shri Sharma any ground in view of the dismissal of the Contempt application on 3-9-1987, a fact borne out from the contents of para 15 of the objection of the opposite parties filed in answer to the application of Sri Sharma dt. 1-9-1987, noticed earlier.
8. Para 5 of the application has two grounds in support of the prayer of Sri Sharma for release and adjournment of the case. They are, firstly, moving of application before the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice for adjournment of the cases till 24-12-1987 and, secondly, "extreme ill health "owing to "acute Diarrhoea." The adjournment application and the order dt. 16-10-1987 passed by the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice are before me.The order dt. 16th Oct., 1987 does not cover the instant case, it being a specially fixed case. So far as the perennial ground of alleged extreme ill health of Sri Sharma owing to accute diarrhoea is concerned there is nothing on record to substantiate the same except his own bald statement not supported by either any medical certificate or even his affidavit which was minimum. Shri Sharma has been appearing and pleading this case personally as he is doing today. He always looked and is looking even today fit enough to proceed with the case. No sign of any physical illness was or is visible. Of course, his demeanour towards Court has been abnormal and detestable. Sometimes, it even became contemptuous inviting action. But neither any action was nor is being taken keeping in view the fact that the unbecoming conduct of Sri Sharma may have been the result of his mental agony and stress on account of imminent eviction from his residential house in pursuance ol the ejectment-decree which the opposite parties hold against him.
9. However, the compassionate view hitherto taken by the Court should not be misunderstood by Sri Sharma as licence for conducting himself in the manner he has conducted so far. Shri Sharma is not an ordinary litigant. He is not only a member of High Court Bar with considerable standing but also an officer of the Court. He is expected to exercise greater caution and restraint in his behaviour vis-a-vis Court.
10. Moving Contempt application against a Judge on flimsy grounds with deliberate intention of embarrassing and disqualifying him from trying a case, setting up against him unfounded plea of bias, open expression of lack of confidence in the Judge without any valid reason and then urging him to release a case, and seeking unnecessary adjournments on non-existent grounds with oblique motive of arresting or obstructing the progress of a case are the instances of contumacious conduct tending to interfere with the administration of justice inviting action for contempt.
11. There exists an ad interim order dt. 8th May, 1987 passed by this Court whereby. further proceedings in relation to the execution of the ejectment-decee against Sri Sharma stand suspected during the pendency of the instant case. Any and every delay in the disposal of this case is, undoubtedly, in the interest of Sri Sharma and it is for attaining this unholy object he undertook the abominable exercises noticed earlier. Sri Sharma should not and cannot be allowed to hold up the final adjudication of the case any more.
12. On the facts, in the circumstances and for the reasons stated above, both the applications of Sri Sharma, dt. 1-9-1987 and 9-11-1987, are rejected. He is called upon to argue out the case on merits.
13. No sooner the dictation of the above order was over Sri Sharma expressed a desire to have opportunity to approach the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice to obtain from him. an order withdrawing the case from me and to engage a counsel. It is not necessary to pass any order in this regard at the moment. The case cannot proceed any longer today as I am now called upon to join a Division Court. The case is directed to be listed on 23rd Nov., 1987 for further orders and in the meantime Shri Sharma may take such steps as he considers appropriate.