LexTHREE CHEERS ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD. & ORS. versus C.E.S.C. LTD.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2008] 14 S.C.R. 789 ~ THREE CHEERS ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD. & ORS. A II. C.E.S.C. LTD. (Civil Appeal No. 6156 of 2008) OCTOBER 20, 2008 B r- _)- [S. B. SINHA AND CYRIAC JOSEPH, JJ.] Contempt of Courts Act, 1970/Contempt of Courts (Calcutta High Court) Rules, 1975- Interlocutory order of Court restraining the defendant in a defamation suit from telecast- c ing and broadcasting a programme which allegedly defamed the plaintiff - On the date of confirmation of the order, Joint Receivers appointed ex parte - Direction to them to take pas- session of materials pertaining to the programme - Defen- dants not handing over the materials to the Joint Receivers, D stating that they had already given the same to the officials of - ._.,.,.., plaintiff - The fact affirmed on affidavit before Court - Trial- directed to find out the correctness of the statement of the de- fend ants - During pend ency of trial, initiation of Contempt pro- ceedings - Defendants held guilty of Contempt of Court - On E appeal held: In the facts of the case, defendants not guilty of contempt - Contemners did not violate the interim order passed by the High Court - There was no basis for appoint- ment of Joint Receivers - Moreover, appointment of the Re- t \ ceives, without notice to the contemners was not correct - lni- tiation of contempt proceedings without conclusion of the trial F to find the correctness of the facts on the basis of which con- tempt was initiated was also not correct - Contempt proceed- ings dropped. A programme produced by appellant-company was G ·~ telecast on television, alleging some illegal acts and mal- practices on the part of respondent-Calcutta Electricity Supply Company Ltd. (CESC). Respondent filed a defa- mation suit before High Court. It also sought interlocu- 789 H 790 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 14 S.C.R. A tory injunction restraining the appellants from publishing ~- by broadcasting/telecasting any defamation suit before High Court. It also sought interlocutory injunction restrain.; ing the appellants from publishing by broadcasting/tele- I casting any defamatory programme similar to the one in f B question and to restrain them from re-telecasting and t: showing a repeat telecast of the programme. Third interim • relief was sought to appoint a receiver over all the materi- -l_, ' als and documents connected with the programme in ~ question. Single Judge of High Court on 17.5.2004 passed c ex-pate ad interim order of injunction in terms of the first ~ two prayers. On 30.11.2005, when the matter came up for confirmation of the interim order, the court in terms of the I third prayer of the application, appointed Joint/Receivers !-- with a direction to take possession of all material docu- I ments, films and materials connected with the programme r- D 1.- in question. The Joint/Receivers, on 14.1.2008, when vis- r- ited the office of the appellants and asked to hand over ----r· the documents and the materials, appellants expressed I their inability to do so stating that such documents had [_ E already been handed over to the representatives of CESC when they had come to the office of the Company on I:: 11.1.2006. Minutes of Meeting pertaining to the visit were submitted before the Court. Appellant No. 3 too affirmed on affidavit as regards the events on 11.1.2006. The Court by its order dated 15.3.2006 directed trial on the issues F whether the CESC officials visited the office of the appel- ' lants and whether the documents and materials con- ~-A,. nected with the programme in question were actually handed over to CESC officials. While the trial on the above ,- issues was pending before another Judge, respondents G initiated contempt proceedings before the Judge who had passed the order dated 30.11.2005. Each one of the con- ~-· temners was held guilty of contempt of court for not hand- ing over the documents and materials to the Joint Receiv- ers. The appeal against the order was dismissed by Divi- H sion Bench of High Court. Hence the present appeal. THREE CHEERS ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD. 791 & ORS. v. C.E.S.C. LTD. * During pendency of appeal before this court, appel- A lant, in the proceedings before High Court, undertook to produce the CDs containing the programme in compli- ance of the interim order. The Court imposed a fine of Rs. 10,000/- on each of the contemner. On the next day of hear- ing, the case was further postponed for non-comp
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.