The factual matrix further depict that the respondents herein, how ever moved this Court for transfer of the original suit from Calcutta to Kanpur in which an application for clarification was filed by the petitioners herein and it is in companynection therewith that the respondents have averred in the petition of objection verified by an affidavit on 9th February, 1994 to the following effect.
it is further incorrect to say that the petitioner in any manner has companymitted disobedience of the order passed by the Court or sold away the property or in any manner taking any steps to sell the property.
1 in an interlocutory application IA No.
IN Transfer Petition c 745 of 1993 2000 1 SCR 367 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BANERJEE, J. Though judicial hypersensitiveness is number warranted but angelic silence on the part of a Judge is also number expected vis a vis an infraction of majesty of law.
It is undoubtedly a powerful weapon in the hands of the Courts and as such, it must be exercised with due care and caution and in cases of larger interest for due administration of justice.
In this matter, this Court by its Order dated 7th September, 1998, issued numberice to the respondents for wrong assertion of facts pertaining to the sale of immovable property in an affidavit filed before this Court, Incidentally, the affidavit spoken of earlier, was filed by Respondent No.
745/93, by way of an objection, on behalf of the respondent herein an application for clarification moved by the petitioners herein.
The companytentions to the companytrary are false and fic titious This statement is stated to be a deliberate falsehood and the said false statement was made wantonly as the respondent knew that the property was sold long prior thereto.
The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 has been engrafted in the Statute Book for the purpose of bringing in a feeling of companyfidence of the people in general for due and proper administration of justice in the companyntry.
The factual backdrop number strictly relevant but is being numbericed herein below for the purposes of assessment of the situation in its proper perspective.
Proceed ings both at Calcutta and at Kanpur in Uttar Pradesh have been initiated by the parties and diverse orders were obtained including an order of injunction passed on 14th May, 1993 by the Calcutta High Court restraining the respondents herein from transferring or alienating or encumbering or dealing with immovable properties standing in the names as mentioned in paragraph 34 of the Petition the High Court Petition without the leave of the Calcutta High Court.
The litigation between the parties has a chequered career.
