SALAM CHAND KANNYARAM Vs. JOOGUL KISSORE RAMDEO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case an order was made on 26 August 1925 appointing a Receiver and directing that the defendant firm do make over to the Receiver the books of account of their firm for a certain year and the hatchittas standing in the benami name of one Ramdeo's brother Baij Nath Motilal and those executed by various debtors of the defendant firm in acknowledgment of their debts. It was further ordered that the defendant firm do makeover to the Receiver or to this Court to be placed to the credit of the suit all moneys realized by them in contravention of a certain order. By another order made on 5 July 1926, it was ordered that the Official Receiver be appointed Receiver in the suit under the order already mentioned and that the said Ramdeo do stand committed to the custody of the Superintendent of the Presidency Jail for contempt of Court for having failed to make over to the said Receiver the hatchittas mentioned in para. 22 of the said petition and that a warrant do issue directed to the Sheriff of Calcutta and to the Superintendent of the Presidency Jail commanding the Sheriff to arrest the said Ramdeo wherever he may be found within the local limits of the jurisdiction of this Court and to convey him to the said jail.

(2.) It appears that Ramdeo was not within the limits of the ordinary civil jurisdiction of the Court but was residing and staying within the District of Nadia in this Province. Accordingly the warrant directed to the Sheriff failed to take effect. In consequence of this the application which is now before us was launched on 31 March 1927, and it asks the learned Judge on the original side for an order directing the District Judge of Nadia to execute the said warrant, seize the person of the defendant wherever found within the said district and convey it to the Sheriff of Calcutta to be by him conveyed over to the Superintendent of the Presidency Jail.

(3.) The learned Judge, Mr. Justice Gregory dismissed this application not being satisfied that he had any jurisdiction to make such an order. It would appear from the minutes of the proceedings before him that Section 136, Civil P.C., was relied upon by the applicants and that the applicants also claimed to be entitled to the exercise of the inherent powers of the Court and also to powers under Section 151 of the Code. Section 36, Civil P.C., was also referred to.