GOPAL L RAHEJA Vs. VIJAY B RAHEJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have been hearing the above Appeal. On 20th April, 2006, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 to 4 sought to tender an affidavit of one Mrs. Tara Subramanyam, Senior Manager of Housing Development and Finance Corporation Ltd. (HDFC). When the same was sought to be tendered, it was found that it was a notarised affidavit. As such, the same was returned back to the learned Counsel so as to enable the said Mrs. Tara Subramanyam to file an affidavit duly sworn before this Court, as Mrs. Tara Subramanyam is residing in Bombay.

(2.) It is strongly contended by the learned Counsel for the Respondents that Mrs.Tara Subramanyam came to the office of this Court to affirm the said affidavit on 21st April, 2006. Appellant 1. Mr. Gopal Raheja had sought to obstruct the said lady Mrs. Tara Subramanyam from affirming her affidavit on 21st April, 2006 in the office of this Court. Therefore, the learned Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 4 contends that the above conduct and action of Appellant No.1 constitutes interference and obstruction in the Administration of Justice. In view thereof, Respondent Nos.1 to 4 have prayed to this Court for initiating "Suo Motu" proceeding for criminal contempt under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act and under Article 215 of the Constitution of India. In that behalf, Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 and an Advocate working with J. Sagar Associates, Advocates for Respondent Nos.1 to 4 as well as the said lady Mrs. Tara Subramanyam, Senior Manager, HDFC have filed their respective affidavits. Appellant No. 1 also has filed his affidavit-in-reply in that behalf.

(3.) The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 to 4 contended that the above conduct of Appellant No. 1 in the office premises of the High Court amounted to serious interference and obstruction in the Administration of Justice as such, this Court ought to "Suo Motu" initiate action for Criminal Contempt against Appellant No. 1.