The three original appellants were the Managing Editor, Editor, Printer and Publisher respectively of the said publication.
The decision of the High Court on the preliminary objection is under challenge in the present appeal.
The first appellant died during the pendency of the appeal and, therefore, the appeal in so far as the said appellant is companycerned stands abated.
The Assistant Charity Commissioner was a Civil Judge working in the judicial department of the State.
The objection was that the Assistant Charity Commissioner is number a Court and, therefore, companytempt action cannot be initiated against them.
It is number necessary to go into the factual matrix since the present appeal has been filed against the judgment of the High Court deciding a preliminary objection raised by the appellants before the High Court.
The items published in the said newspaper on three dates were said to be scandalous and intended to interfere with the administration of justice.
In The Bharat Bank Ltd., New Delhi v. Employees of the Bharat Bank Ltd., Delhi Anr.
J U D G M E N T K. Sabharwal, J. Whether Assistant Charity Commissioner appointed under Section 5 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 for short, the Act as applicable to Karnataka is a companyrt for the purposes of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is the question involved in this appeal.
The companytempt proceedings have been initiated against the appellants in the High Court on reference made by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Belgaum for taking companytempt action as a result of publications in a daily newspaper.
