(ORDER OF THE COURT WAS MADE BY B. RAJENDRAN, J.) This contempt petition arises out of violation of the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Gudiyattam in I.A.No.1 of 2009 in O.S.No.4 of 2009, dated 05.1.2009 in respect of seizure of a vehicle.
2. By the said order, Mr.V.Ranjith Kumar was appointed as the Advocate Commissioner to seize the vehicle in question and hand over its custody to the petitioner. Pursuant to the same, the Advocate Commissioner has seized the vehicle and also filed his report. In this connection, it is pertinent to point out here that before the seizure of the vehicle, the Commissioner has sought for the permission of the Court to seek the help of the police for seizing the vehicle and only pursuant to that, he went there to seize the vehicle. The report filed by the Advocate Commissioner in respect of the seizure of the vehicle is extracted below:-
VERNACULAR ( TAMIL ) PORTION DELETED
3. A reading of the report would clearly indicate that the Commissioner having seized the vehicle, the contemnors' persons or henchmen came along in the road, intercepted the vehicle seized by the Commissioner near a petrol bunk, and they have even stoned on the vehicle to release it from the custody of the Commissioner, who is an officer of the Court. This is a very serious offence committed by the contemnors. It is a direct violation of the Court order and the seizure of the vehicle from the hands of the Commissioner is totally illegal. It is also pertinent to note here that the Commissioner himself has given a complaint at the Veppankuppam Police Station and the same has been noted as C.S.R.No.8 of 2009. He has also further stated that he was not able to execute the warrant any further in view of the fact that the contemnors have got too much manpower. In this state of affairs, we are pained to hear from an officer of the Court that the orders of the Court are being flouted at the whims and fancies of the defendants in the suit.
4. The only argument now put forward by the contemnors is that on the very same date when the vehicle was either seized or released, as the case may be, as put forward by the contemnors, an amount of Rs.1,13,540/-, which is alleged to be an arrears of amount on the seized vehicle, seems to have been paid by him on the file of the Court in O.S.No.4 of 2009 and that he continues to pay the arrears of amount as on date without any fail.
5. The very representation that the payment, as sought for by the plaintiff, has been made will not cure the defect or the misdeeds done by the defendants, especially when the order of the Court has been flouted and violated using manpower and muscle power. The attitude of the contemnors needs a stringent warning so as to prevent any such recurrence in future and also to act as a deterrent to others from flouting Court orders. Hence, we are constrained to punish the contemnors for their act of contempt. No doubt, at this point of time, the learned Advocate appearing for the contemnors pleaded leniency on the ground that the entire amount as claimed in the plaint, viz., Rs.1,13,540/- has been deposited by him in the Court on the same day. However, we are inclined to punish him by way of imposition of fine only to show that the action done by the contemnors is not in accordance with law.
6. Therefore, we propose to levy a sum of Rs.2,000/- as fine to be paid by the contemnors to the Commissioner, who has been humiliated by the contemnors' action. The defendants/contemnors should pay the fine amount of Rs.2000/- to the Commissioner by way of Demand Draft to be drawn in the name of the Commissioner within a period of two weeks from this date and file a memo of compliance to that effect before the concerned Court, i.e. the Subordinate Court. If the contemnors fail to pay the said fine amount of Rs.2000/- in two weeks' time, we direct him to be kept in civil prison for a period of one month in lieu of the fine imposed. We, however, conclude with a note that such action of the defendants should not be allowed to be done by others hereafter and to show our anguish, this punishment of fine is being imposed on the contemnors.
7. The contempt petition is closed with the aforesaid observations.
js