V G PETERSON Vs. O V FORBES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mrs. v. G. Peterson has filed the present petition which has been referred to a Bench by a learned Single Judge by order dated 22nd of May 1961 on the ground that the original con. tempt proceedings were being heard by a Bench. The facts of this case 'have been, in the main, given in judgment of my learned brother and I will mention only a few more facts given in the petition,. It appears that the petitioner's mother had executed, a will on 23rd of January, 1938 devising all lire property to her three children including the present petitioner and Mr. O. V. Forbes. On 30th November 1939 a probate was granted in respect of this will and in proceedings connected with that probate, the applicant Mrs. V. G. Peterson filed an application on 6-5-1943 alleging that Mr. O. V. Forbes, now dead, had committed slander against the Court. Thereupon a notice was issued to Mr. Forbes. He failed to appear and the Court then by order dated 23rd September. 1943 took action to compel the attendance of Mr. Forbes, The relevant portion of the order reads: Accordingly we order that action be taken under Section 87 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against Mr. Forbes and direct the issue of a written proclamation requiring him t appear in this Court on the 25th November, 1943, at 10 A.M. This proclamation will be issued in strict as cordage with the requirements of Section 87, Criminal Procedure Code ... Under Section 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure we further order attachment of the movable and immovable property belonging to Mr. Forbes within the jurisdiction of this Court including.

(2.) Then by a subsequent order dated South March, 1944 after recording evidence a Bench of the Chief Court of Avadh slated: We have recorded the evidence im tine "absence of Mr. Forbes, who has not appeared. It is not possible under the circumstances to finally dispose of these applications unless and until Mr. Forbes voluntarily appears or is arrested and is brought before us. These applications will therefore be adjourned sine die until Mr. Forbes appears or is arrested. We direct the District Magistrate of tuck-now to arrest Mr. O. V. Forbes under a non bailable warrant whenever he enters the United Provinces and produce him before this Court

(3.) As I' have indicated1 earlier, this Court never intended to attach any part of the unadministered estate of Mrs. a. E. Forbes. this Court attached property belonging to Mr. O. V. Forbes and that is made clear in the extracts given by me earlier and also, in the position taken up b the present petitioner at earlier stages. In any case the order dated 21-9-1944 makes it clear that Mrs. Peterson was to hand Over that property which she may be "holding as a custodian for Mr. O. V. Fortes.