Mr.Praveen M.K. v. Ravi Prasad Naik
Case brief
What is this about?
In Civil Contempt Proceedings, the High Court held that mere observations by the Tribunal regarding documentation priority did not amount to willful disobedience of a specific direction. Consequently, the contempt proceedings against the Bank were dropped as no positive direction was violated.
What did the court decide?
The contempt proceedings against the Respondent-Bank are dropped as there was no positive direction disobedied.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S. SANJAY GOWDA
C.C.C. No.1672/2019 (CIVIL)
BETWEEN:
1 . MR. PRAVEEN M.K S/O MR. M.V. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RESIDING AT B-1203 VASUNDHARA KRITHIKA APTS 75/2, 100FT. OUTER RING ROAD OPPOSITE PES COLLEGE BSK 3RD STAGE BENGALURU – 560 085.
2 . MS. MADHAVI PRAVEEN W/O MR. PRAVEEN M.K AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS RESIDING AT B-1203 VASUNDHARA KRITHIKA APTS 75/2, 100 FT. OUTER RING ROAD OPPOSITE PES COLLEGE BSK 3RD STAGE BENGALURU – 560 085.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether mere observation by the Tribunal regarding priority of sale agreement constitutes willful disobedience warranting contempt proceedings against the Bank.
Whether the Contempt Proceedings ought to be maintained in the absence of a positive direction disobeyed by the Respondent.
Parties & counsel
- respondent
Ravi Prasad Naik
Coram
Aravind Kumar
N.S. Sanjay Gowda
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Karnataka HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- CCC/1672/2019
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court