DIWAN DURGA DAS Vs. B R KISHORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Sections 2 and 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act made by Diwan Durga Das in connection with a writ petition (No. 143 of 1957) filed by him against Sri Brij Raj Kishore, a police officer, and two others whose names are not disclosed in the petition. This application also purports to be against three persons but their names are not given at the top of the application. The name of one, Mohammad Ilyas, a head constable is however mentioned in paragraphs 6 and 7 of this application as well as the prayer at the end and so it can be inferred that one of these three persons is Mohammad llyas. The petition further discloses that some information was given by an employee of the office of the Rent Control and Eviction Officer whose name was to be ascertained and so it may be presumed that one of the opposite parties was that employee who provided that information. The third person is described in the prayer as opposite party No. 2 whose assistant provided wrong information and this presumably means the Rent Control and Eviction Officer.

(2.) The facts of the case are that Sri Durga Das had purchased a house situate at Way Road, Lucknow. This house was tenanted by some police officer who was transferred. Sri Durga Das prayed that as the house was about to fall vacant this should be allotted to him as he had no house and he was staying as a guest of a relation. This prayer was made by him to the Rent Control and Eviction Officer. His prayer was not accepted and the house was allotted to Sri Brij Raj Kishore. Sri Durga Das felt that his prayer was not considered in a judicial manner by the Rent Control And Eviction Officer and an arbitrary order was passed and so he moved the writ petition mentioned above. Along with this writ petition he also prayed that Sri Brij Raj Kishore should not be permitted to occupy this house by placing his furniture and goods. This application came before a single Judge on 15-7-1957 at about 11 a. m. and the Junior Standing Counsel for the State, appearing on behalf of the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Lucknow, staled that he had received instructions to the effect that the house had already been occupied by the allottee and his luggage was in the house. Sri Durga Das felt doubtful about the correctness of this statement and so he went to the house immediately and at about 2 p. m., on the same day, be filed another affidavit to the effect that up to 1 p. m., the house was not occupied by Sri Brij Raj Kishore and there was no luggage belonging to Sri Rrij Raj Kishore in that house. He further prayed that a commissioner should immediately be appointed to verify the facts mentioned by him in his affidavit. The Court was pleased to appoint a commissioner and Sri Mohammad Haider, the commissioner, proceeded to the house. We will quote the exact words of the learned judge issuing directions to the commissioner:

(3.) Sri Mohammad Haider accompanied by Sri Dugra Das came to the house and found it open. He found some furniture of Sri Brij Raj Kishore present in the house and he made an inventory of that furniture. He found two constables Puran Singh and Mohammad llyas inside the house. The commissioner recorded the statements of these two constables and asked them to put their signatures or thumb impressions on these statements. Puran Singh constable did so, but Mohammad Ilyas refused to put his signatures on the statement which was recorded. The commissioner after taking down the statements and preparing the inventory submitted the report before the learned Judge.