CHINNASAMI THANJIROYAR Vs. PICHAI MARICAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition arises out of an order made by the District Munsiff of Tiruturaipundi inflicting a fine of Rs. 50 on the petitioner who had appeared as a wtiness for the plaintiff in a suit before him. The petitioner vainly appealed to the District Judge of East Tanjore. He therefore comes to this Court on the ground that the District Munsiff had no jurisdiction to impose a fine and that therefore the District Judge was wrong in confirming such an order.

(2.) A preliminary objection was taken on behalf of the respondent that in such a matter only one appeal is allowed and reference was made to Section 104(h) of the Code of Civil Procedure. This section, however, refers to an order imposing a fine and made under the provisions of the Code. As I hold that the order was not made under any of the provisions of the Code and that the learned District Munsiff had no jurisdiction, this section does not apply and the objection must be overruled.

(3.) The question is whether the District Munsiff has power to punish in respect of contempt of Court in circumstances such as appear in this case. The petitioner,as stated, was a witness for the plaintiff in a suit. During his examination it emerged that he had accounts of some kind which might throw light upon the issue between the parties. He had not the accounts with him and the District Munsiff ordered him to produce them in Court on another day. The petitioner apparently took no notice of this direction and neither appeared in Court again nor produced the accounts. The District Munsiff, who had apparently taken a very unfavourable view of the petitioner's demeanour in the witness box, had no difficulty on the application made by the defendant-the present respondent, in regarding his disobedience as directly in contempt of the order to produce the accounts. He therefore imposed the fine and in default ordered that the petitioner's property should be attached and sold.