Contempt

Contempt

It is a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence and it is in public interest also that no action can lie against a Judge of a Court of Record for a judicial act done by the Judge.

The remedy of the aggrieved party against such an order is to approach the higher forum through appropriate proceedings.

This immunity is essential to enable the Judges of the Court of Record to discharge their duties without fear or favour, through remaining within the bounds of their jurisdiction.

Immunity from any civil or criminal action or a charge of contempt of Court is is essential for maintaining independence of the judiciary and for the strength of the administration of justice.

The following passage from - Oswald’s Contempt of Court:

‘An action will not lie against a Judge of a Court of Record for a wrongful commitment in the exercise of his judicial duties, any more than for an erroneous judgment. But the Divisional Court refused to strike out as disclosing no cause of action a statement of clam in an action for malicious prosecution brought against certain Judges of the Supermen Court of Trinidad for having of their own motion, and without any evidence, caused the plaintiff to be prosecuted and committed to prison for an alleged contempt of the SC in forwarding to the Governor of the Colony for transmission to the Queen in Council a petition of appeal complaining of the oppressive conduct of the defendants as Judges.

“If any Judge exercises his jurisdiction from ‘malicious motives he has been guilty of a gross ‘dereliction of duty’.

And after saying that a Judge was liable to be removed from his office for such conduct, Lord Eaher went on to say that the common law clearly was that no action lay against a Judge of a Court of Record ‘for doing something within his jurisdiction but ‘doing it maliciously and contrary to good faith’.

Judicial Discipline

Judicial discipline:The Chief Justice is the master of the roster. He has full power, authority and jurisdiction in the matter of allocation of business of the HC. (AIR 1982 SC 1198)Mad HC 1991 (2) Mad LW 80 (FB) The Hon’ble the Chief Justice has the inherent power to allocate the judicial business of the HC including who of the Judges should sit alone and who should constitute the Bench of two or more Judges.No litigant shall, upon such constitution of a Bench or allotment of a case to a particular Judge of the Court will have a right to question the jurisdiction of the Judges or the Judge hearing the case.No person can claim as a matter of right that this petition be heard by a single Judge or a Division Bench or a particular single Judge or a particular Division Bench.
No judge on a Bench of Judges will assume jurisdiction unless the case is allotted to him or them under the orders of the Hon’ble Chief Justice.The Supreme Court in (1996) 6 SCC 587It is the prerogative of the Chief Justice to constitute benches of his High Court and the allocate work to such benches.
Judicial discipline requires that the puisne Judges of the HC comply with directions given in this regard by their Chief Justice.Individual puisne Judges cannot pick and choose the matters they will hear or decide nor can they decide whether to sit singly or in a Division Bench.Calcutta HC in AIR 1990 Cal 168 (DB)Till any determination made by the Chief Justice lasts, no Judge who sits singly or constitute a DB with another Judge and take up any other kind of judicial business.FB of Allahabad HC in Snajay Kumar Srivastava vs Acting Chief Justice(1996 All Weekly cases 644)If the Judges were free to choose their jurisdiction or any choice was given to them to do whatever case they may like to hear and decide, the machinery of the Court would collapse and the judicial functioning of the Court would cease by generation of internal strife on account of hankering for a particular jurisdiction or a particular case.The nucleus for proper functioning of the Court is the ‘self’ and ‘judicial’ discipline of Judges which is sought to be achieved by Rules of Court by placing in the hands of the Chief Justice full authority and power to distribute work to the Judges and to regulate their jurisdiction and sittings.SC in AIR 1990 SC 1737Judicial restraint and discipline are as necessary to the orderly administration of justice as they are to the effectiveness of the army.The duty of restraint, this humility of function should be constant theme of our judges.This quality in decision making is as much necessary for judges to command respect as to protect the independence of the judiciary.Respect to those who come before the Court as well to other co-ordinate branches of the State, the executive and the legislature. There must be mutual respect. When these qualities fail or when litigants and public believe that the Judge has failed in these qualities, it will be neither good for the Judge nor for the judicial process.The Judge’s Bench is a seat of power. Not only do Judges have power to make binding decision, their decisions legitimate the use of power by other officials.
The Judges have the absolute and unchallengeable control of the Court domain. But they cannot misuse their authority by intemperate comments, undignified banter or scathing criticism of counsel, parties or witnesses. We concede that the Court has the inherent power to act freely upon its own conviction on any matter coming before it for adjudication, but it is a general principle of the highest importance to the proper administrative of justice that derogatory remarks ought not to be made against persons or authorities whose conduct comes into consideration unless it is absolutely necessary for the decision of the case.By the very nature of their office, the Judges of the SC or the HC, cannot enter into a public controversy and file affidavits to repudiate any criticism or allegations made against them. Silence, as an option, becomes necessary by the very nature of the office which the Judges hold.Those who criticise the Judges in relation to their judicial or administrative work, must remember that the criticism, even if outspoken, can only be of the judgment but not of the Judge.By casting aspersions on the Judges personally or using intemperate language against them, the critics, whoever they may be, strike a blow at the prestige of the institution and erode its credibility. That must be avoided at all costs.

Kattalai Grants in South India

KATTALAI GRANTS IN SOUTH INDIA

Kattalai or special grant:

A special grant for religious services in a temple which is in vogue in Southern India and is known by the name of Kattalai.

As Muttusami Aiyyar, J. explained in Vythilinga v. Somasundara, in ordinary parlance, the term Kattalai as applied to temple means endowments and signifies a special endowment for certain specific service or religious charity in the temple.

Ardajama Kattalai or endowment for midnight service is an instance of the former and Annadan Kattalai or an endowment for distributing food to the poor is an example of the latter.

In this sense the word Kattalai is used in contradistinction to the endowment designed generally for the upkeep and maintenance of the temple. Persons who endow properties for kattalais are entitled to appoint special trustees to administer them, and the general trustees of the institution have no right to dispossess them. And if under the terms of the grant, the special trustee has to utilise the income for specified services in the temple, the general trustee has the right, as the person in charge generally of the temple, to require the special trustee to hand over the income to him. But the special trustee is, in respect of the management of the kattalai properties, under the same obligations as a trustee, and an alienation by him of those properties would be void, unless it is for necessity or benefit. In the case of some important temples, the sources of the income are classified into distinct endowments according to their importance. Each endowment is placed under a separate trustee and specific items of expenditure are assigned to it as legitimate charges to be paid therefrom. Each of such endowments is called also a Kattalai and the trustee who administers it is called the Kattlaigar or stanik of the particular Kattalai.

The import of this expression was discussed in detail by Sesagiri Aiyyar, J. in Ambala Vana v Sree Minakshy. According to him, this expression is used with reference to three different kinds of endowments. Properties may be endowed—

(a) for the performance of pujas in the temple, or

(b) for the performance of certain festivals in the temple, or

(c) for the performance of Archanas to the deity in the name of the donors.

(a) Ordinarily, the puja is not performed in the name of the donor, and consequently, supplementary grants are made by pious persons in order that the service should be more efficiently performed. Instances of this type of grant are to be found in the famous temple at Chidambaram, where almost all the necessary daily services are conducted by means of Kattalais endowed by pious donors.

(b) It also happens that where lands for funds in respect of particular service or festival at temples are not sufficient for conducting them on the original scale, new donors come forward to supplement these funds.

(c) For Archana, however, no supplementary grant by other donors is possible.

It is intended solely for the spiritual benefit of the grantor and it is not the concern of third parties to help in his performance if the funds are for any reason not found sufficient. Whatever the exact nature of Kattalais may be-and that must depend upon the usages of particular temples-one fact ought to be remembered in this connection, and that is that when the grant is to the deity and the income of particular funds is earmarked for special services which are entrusted to special trustees, if there is a surplus which cannot be spent on these services, it would be a case for the application of the cy pres doctrine and the special trustee can, on no account, claim the surplus. This has been held by the Judicial Committee in an appeal from the Madras High Court.