A. A. Mohan v. Shanmughavel — 1997 DIGILAW 253 (MAD)

Judgment :- AR. LAKSHMANAN, J. The above matter has been placed before us again under the orders of the Hon'ble Chief Justice dt. 4-2-1997 in view of the fact that M. Srinivasan, J. as he then was, who presided over the Bench along with one of us (A. R. Lakshmanan, J.) which dealt with O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995 has since been elevated as the Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court. 2. The judgment in O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995 was delivered by M. Srinivasan, J. as he then was, on behalf of the Bench. In the course of disposal of the appeal, certain observations had been made by the Bench in paragraphs 9 and 10 of the said judgment. The said observations came to be made in the context of certain events noticed in paragraphs 5 to 8. In view of the above, the petitioner herein has moved the Supreme Court by means of a Special Leave Petition in I.A. No. 1 in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 1643 of 1996. A copy of the Special Leave petition was placed before us. A perusal of the same indicates that the appeal itself was confined to the observations made in paragraphs 6 to 11 of the judgment in O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995 and not at any rate, with reference to the disputes between the parties or the merits of the claim as such. 3. When the matter came before the Supreme Court on 16-4-1996, their Lordships have passed the following order : "Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that this matter be taken up after sometime to enable the petitioner in the meantime to tender a fresh unconditional apology in the Madras High Court. We may observe that the apology, if any, tendered by the petitioner in the meantime may be considered by the High Court in the manner it deems fit. List the matter in the last week of July 1996." * 4. Pursuant to the above order, the petitioner herein filed CMP No. 12503 of 1996 praying among other things as to why this Court should not be pleased to accept the petitioner's unconditional apology and expunge paragraphs 6 to 11 of the judgment dt. 16-8-1995 in O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995. Pursuant to the above order, the petitioner herein filed CMP No. 12503 of 1996 praying among other things as to why this Court should not be pleased to accept the petitioner's unconditional apology and expunge paragraphs 6 to 11 of the judgment dt. 16-8-1995 in O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995. In support of that petition, the petitioner A.A. Mohan filed an affidavit in which it has been stated as follows : "I state that in the course of the judgment, the Division Bench passed certain remarks against me as a counsel on record for 1st respondent. 3. Aggrieved by the remarks, I filed a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court bearing S. L. P. No. 1643 of 1996 (Civil) for expunging the remarks contained in paras 6 to 11 of the order passed in O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995 dated 16-8-1995 4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has admitted the S.L.P. and has directed me to tender fresh unconditional apology before this Hon'ble Court for consideration. 5. I humbly submit that the remarks made by the Division Bench in the course of the order and judgment dt. 16-8-1995 would affect my reputation and career. 6. I state that the remarks against me does not have any bearing on the merits of the case. Expunging of the remarks by this Hon'ble Court would not in any way affect the merits of the case. 7. I hereby tender my unconditional apology for any of my acts unwittingly done in the course of the above case. The acts are neither intentional nor deliberate. 8. I pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to accept my unconditional apology and expunge paras 6 to 11 of the order and judgment dt. 16-8-1995 in O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995 and thereby render justice. 5. At the time of hearing on 1-11-1996, the petitioner A.A. Mohan filed another affidavit expressing unconditional apology and requested the Court to accept the same and expunge paragraphs 6 to 11 of the judgment dt. 16-8-1995 in O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995. The affidavit reads thus : "I hereby sincerely and unconditionally apologise for any of my acts unwittingly done in the course of the above case. As an Officer of the Court, I had no intention to commit any wrongful activity or misconduct myself in any proceedings. In respect of the above case my acts were not intentional and deliberate. The affidavit reads thus : "I hereby sincerely and unconditionally apologise for any of my acts unwittingly done in the course of the above case. As an Officer of the Court, I had no intention to commit any wrongful activity or misconduct myself in any proceedings. In respect of the above case my acts were not intentional and deliberate. I pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to accept my unconditional apology and be pleased to expunge paras 6 to 11 of the order and judgment dt. 16-8-1995 passed in O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995 and thereby render justice. 6. After hearing Mr. R. Krishnamurthi, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A. L. Somayaji learned Senior Counsel for the respondent, we passed the following order in this petition on 1-11-1996 : "On going through the affidavits filed as also the submissions of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, we are able to appreciate the bona fides of the unconditional apology tendered and that the petitioner did act (not) intend to malign the authority and dignity of the Court. Except recording our views as above, we are unable to accede to the request of the petitioner for expunging paragraphs 6 to 11 of the order and judgment dt. 16-8-1995 in O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995 for the reason that in paragraph 4 of the affidavit filed along with application in this Court it is stated that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has admitted the Special leave Petition and the said Special Leave petition is still pending. That apart, we find that the direction said to have been given by their Lordships of the Supreme Court was meant to tender fresh unconditional apology before this Court for consideration and there is no indication about our being enabled even during the pendency of the Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court to consider and pass orders relating to the request for expunging paras 6 to 11 of the judgment in O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995, when the matter is sub judice before the Appellate Court. In the absence of any specific permission or liberty granted to this Court to deal with the request for the relief of expunging paragraphs 6 to 11 from the judgment, we consider it inappropriate and impermissible for us in the teeth of the pending Special Leave Petition before their Lordships of the Supreme Court, to entertain the request of the petitioner for such a relief." 7. Thus, it is seen, we could not consider expugning paragraphs 6 to 11 of the judgment dt. 16-8-1995 in O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995 in the absence of specific direction from the Supreme Court and also for the reason that the Special Leave Petition filed by the petitioner herein is still pending before the Supreme Court. 8. The petitioner filed another affidavit dt. 20-1-1997 stating that the matter was again listed before the Supreme Court on 6-1-1997 and on perusing our order dt. 1-11-1996 in C.R.L.P. No. 12503 of 1996. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court passed the following order : "We have perused the High Court's order dt. 1st Nov. 1996, We make it clear that it is open to the High Court to consider the question of expunging the remarks made by it in respect of the petitioner in its earlier order. List after eight weeks at the request of counsel." A xerox copy of the order of the Supreme Court dt. 6-1-1997 was annexed to the said affidavit and marked as Annexure 'A'. 9. In view of the above direction of the Supreme Court, the petitioner again filed the above affidavit dt. 20-1-1997 praying to expunge paragraphs 6 to 11 of the judgment dt. 16-8-1995 in O.S.A. No.147 of 1995. That is how the matter has come before us again under orders of the Hon'ble Chief Justice dt. 4-2-1997. 10. We have heard the respective Senior Counsel appearing on either side. It is seen from the affidavits filed by the petitioner that he had no intention to commit any wrongful activity or misconduct himself in any proceedings. It appears to us that his acts were not intentional and deliberate. Except that he could have been more careful, nothing condemnable could be attributed to him. It is seen from the affidavits filed by the petitioner that he had no intention to commit any wrongful activity or misconduct himself in any proceedings. It appears to us that his acts were not intentional and deliberate. Except that he could have been more careful, nothing condemnable could be attributed to him. On going through the affidavits filed and also the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, we are able to appreciate the sincerity and the bona fides of the unconditional apology tendered by the petitioner and in our opinion, he did not intend to malign the authority, dignity and majesty of this Court. We, therefore, accede to his request for expunging paragraphs 6 to 10 only in the judgment dt. 16-8-1995 in O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995. The judgment could otherwise stand without even these paragraphs, on merits of the same. 11. Paragraph 11 of the judgment, which is also sought to be expunged by the petitioner, deals with the case on merits. There is no reference about the conduct or behaviour of the petitioner in that paragraph. Therefore, we are unable to accede to the request of the petitioner for expunging paragraph 11. 12. For the foregoing reasons, while accepting the unconditional apology tendered by the petitioner in Court and also through his affidavits, we expunge paragraphs 6 to 10 of the judgment dt. 16-8-1995 in O.S.A. No. 147 of 1995. The petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Order accordingly.