1 IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL SIDE JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 829 OF 2005 IN Show Cause Notice No. 3 of 2005 IN Company Application No. 40 of 2002 IN COMPANY PETITION NO. 129 OF 1996 Reliable Disposable Glass Containers Pvt. Ltd., ... Appellants. V/s. Integrated Finance Co. Ltd., & Ors. ... Respondents. --- WITH APPEAL NO. 1033 OF 2005 IN Show Cause Notice No. 3 of 2005 IN Company Application No. 40 of 2002 IN COMPANY PETITION NO. 129 OF 1996 Rajeev M. Dixit ... Appellant. V/s. Integrated Finance Ltd., & Ors. ... Respondents. --- Mr.S. W.Kulkarni for the Appellant. Mr.B. Amin for Respondent No.1. --- 2 CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH AND V.R.KINGAONKAR,JJ. DATED: 17TH MARCH, 2010 P.C.: 1. Both the Appeals are directed against the same order passed by the learned single Judge. Therefore, both the Appeals can be conveniently disposed of by a common order. 2. The learned single Judge of this court made an order dated 11th March, 2005 which reads as under : The office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master, High Court, Mumbai is directed to issue show cause notice to the following directors of the company as well as the Purchaser namely M/s. Reliable Disposable Glass Containers P. Ltd., asking them to appear before the Court on 24.03.2005 and stating that why action should not be initiated against them for breaking the lock and seal of the Official Liquidator. 3 Pursuant to this order, a show cause notice was issued, asking the persons named in the order as to why they should not be punished for having committed contempt of the court by breaking the lock and seal of the official liquidator. Pursuant to the show cause notice, the persons appeared and showed cause. The defence of M/s. Reliable Disposable Glass Containers, who was the purchasers and is Appellant in Appeal No. 829 of 2005, was that they were not aware that the Court has appointed liquidator on the property before they purchased the same. Another purchaser one Mr. Rajiv Dixit, who is appellant in Appeal No. 1033 of 2005, submitted that he was also not aware of the order. The learned single Judge passed the order dated 7th June, 2005 on the show cause notice. By that order the Appellant in Appeal No. 1033 of 2005 was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months and fine of Rs. 2000/- and so far as the Company which is the Appellant in Appeal No. 829 of 2005 is concerned, it is directed to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-. This order 4 is challenged in these Appeals. 3. Two contentions were urged before us; the first contention was that perusal of the order dated 11th March,2005, quoted above, shows that the appellants have committed contempt of the court by breaking the lock and seal which was put by the official liquidator and therefore, on the face of it, it will not amount to a civil contempt but it will amount to a criminal contempt and therefore, in terms of section 18 of the Contempt of Courts Act, the order pursuant to the show cause notice could have been passed only by a Bench, consisting of not less than two Judges. In other words, the learned single Judge had no jurisdiction to pass the order on the said show cause notice. It is submitted that contempt of the court is a quasi criminal action and therefore, on the basis of a cryptic show cause notice which does not give details of the alleged conduct, the order of conviction cannot be made. Sofaras the first ground is concerned, it is clear from the perusal of the definition of the terms 5 civil contempt and criminal contempt found in section 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act that the contempt alleged against the Appellants was a criminal contempt and as provided under section 18 of the Contempt of Courts Act, the learned single Judge of this court ought not to have passed the order. Therefore, in our opinion, both the Appeals really succeed on this ground itself. However, we found considerable substance in the second ground also that the show cause notice is cryptic. 4. In the result, therefore, both the Appeals succeed and allowed. The order impugned in the Appeals is hereby set aside. (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.) (V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) .....