KAT not subordinate to High Court, cannot initiate contempt of court proceedings for violation of KAT orders: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that it cannot initiate contempt of court proceedings for alleged breach of orders passed by Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (KAT) as it is not subordinate to the High Court, within the meaning of Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act (Lalsab v. CM Kama)..A Division Bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum, while disposing off a civil contempt petition filed by one Lalsab Nadaf, highlighted that KAT was established under the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal Act, 1976 thereby precluding the High Court from exercising its contempt jurisdiction for violation of KAT's orders. ."Therefore, it is not possible to accept the submission that the KAT constituted under the said Act of 1976 is a Court subordinate to the High Court within the meaning of Section 10 of the said Act of 1971. Therefore, an action under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 cannot be initiated on the ground of alleged breach of the interim order of the Appellate Tribunal," the Court said. .The applicant had moved the High Court under Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India. It was prayed that the High Court issue notice to the accused, Chief Manager of a Cooperative Bank and to punish him with maximum punishment for disobedience of the order dated June 27, 2019 passed by the KAT..The counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that KAT was established under the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal Act, 1976 and is subordinate to the High Court in view of Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Therefore, the High Court has the power to punish a person for committing contempt of the order passed by the KAT, it was contended. .Further, it was contended that considering as the Act of 1976, KAT has all the trappings of the Court. .Moreover, the members of the KAT have the power to give a decision by a definitive judgment which is in the nature of a judicial pronouncement. In this regard, the KAT will have to be held to be a 'Court' within the meaning of the Contempt of Courts Act. .After hearing the rival submissions, the Bench examined the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act. It noted that in Section 10 of the Act, the words used are "courts subordinate to it". When the law uses the words "courts subordinate to it", it implies that the High Court has an administrative control over the said Courts, the Bench opined. .Further, the Court also went through the provisions of Karnataka Appellate Tribunal Act, 1976, in order to gauge the composition, powers and functions of KAT etc. ."The provisions of the said Act of 1976 do not provide for any administrative control by the High Court over the KAT......We have also perused the provisions of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal Regulations, 1979. Even the Regulations do not suggest that the High Court retains any administrative control over the KAT," the Court concluded. .With these observations, the Court rejected the plea. .[Read order here]