Disposed

Mr. G Vaman Pai v. Mr. Naveen Prabhu

Karnataka HC2 Nov 2020CCC/169/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court accepted the respondent's compliance with handing over keys. An undertaking for fresh demand draft was accepted. As no case for contempt was made out, the petition was disposed of with a stay on further proceedings contingent on payment of the monetary part within ten days.

What did the court decide?

Petition is disposed of with a warning that petitioner can apply for revival of the contempt petition if respondent fails to pay the monetary part within ten days.

Mr. G Vaman Pai Vs Mr. Naveen Prabhu — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HON’BLE MR.ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶4

AND

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶6

C.C.C. NO.169 OF 2020 (CIVIL)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR G. VAMAN PAI S/O LATE G. VISHWANATH PAI AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT 5-76, GURUOPUR CITY NEAR CENTRAL SILK PALACE MULUR VILLAGE MANGALORE TALUK – 575 001

¶9

… COMPLAINANT

¶10

(BY SHRI K. CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

MR. NAVEEN PRABHU S/O LATE MADHAVA PRABHU AGED 47 YEARS RESIDING NEAR SCHOOL ROAD GURUPUR MULOOR VILLAGE MANGALORE TALUK – 575 001

¶13

… ACCUSED ---

¶14

(BY SHRI B.S. SACHIN, ADVOCATE)

¶15

THIS C.C.C. IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF

¶16

THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 READ WITH ARTICLE

¶17

¶18

215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED 29.08.2018 PASED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.11852/2017 (GM-CPC) AND ETC.

¶19

THIS C.C.C. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Though belatedly, yesterday the respondent-accused has

¶22

handed over the keys of the subject premises to the complainant. This fact is confirmed by the learned counsel appearing for the complainant.

¶23

As regards the monetary part of the compliance, the respondent-accused states that the Demand Draft taken by the respondent which is referred in the affidavit filed by him, is no longer valid and therefore, a fresh Demand Draft will be purchased and handed over to the complainant within ten days from today. We accept the said statement as an undertaking of the accused.

¶24

¶25

In view of what is recorded above, no case is made out to

¶26

proceed further against the respondent-accused under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The petition is, therefore, disposed of. However, on the failure of the respondentaccused to pay the monetary part of the compliance within ten days from today, the complainant will be entitled to apply for

¶27

revival of the contempt petition.

¶28

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

¶29

Sd/JUDGE

¶30

vgh*

Mr. G Vaman Pai v. Mr. Naveen Prabhu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. G Vaman Pai v. Mr. Naveen Prabhu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Durga Prasad Vs Reverend Prasanna Kumar Samuel

Mr. John Gabriel D Silva Vs State of Karnataka

Sri R a Pradeep Vs Sri N Murari

M K Devendra Kumar Vs Dr.Venkatesh

B Hanumanthappa Vs State of Karnataka

Sri M B Ravishankar Vs Sri Gurudath Heggade, IAS