Complainant filed criminal contempt conraining non-compliance with a writ order to dispose of an appeal within six weeks. Bench noted that the appeal was disposed of on 25.10.2019, thereby complying with the direction, and dropped the contempt proceeding.
Contempt proceeding dropped due to compliance of the direction issued in the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF MARCH, 2020
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
C.C.C. No.489/2019 (CIVIL)
BETWEEN:
Mrs. RANI M ALEX W/O Mr. SAJI M. ALEX AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT No.35, 2ND CROSS D’ COSTA SQUARE COOKE TOWN BENGALURU – 560 084. ... COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI PRAKASH T. HEBBAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SHRI RAMESH THE CHIEF ENGINEER BENGALURU WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD CAUVERY BHAVAN BENGALURU – 560 001. …RESPONDENT/ ACCUSED
(BY SRI B.L. SANJEEV, ADVOCATE FOR ACCUSED)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO HOLD THE ACCUSED GUILTY OF COMMISSION OF CONTEMPT OF ORDER DATED 06.08.2018 PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.31544/2018 (GM-BWSSB) AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO CONVICT THE ACCUSED AND SENTENCE THEM TO IMPRISONMENT
2
FOR A TERM OF SIX MONTHS AND TO PAY FINE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 OR FOR SUCH FURTHER PERIOD OF IMPRISONMENT AS THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT IN EXERCISE OF ITS POWER UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, ARAVIND KUMAR J, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
This contempt proceeding has been initiated by writ petitioner for alleging that respondent has willfully disobeyed the direction issued in W.P.No.31544/2018 on 6th August 2018, whereunder a writ of mandamus came to be issued to respondent No.1 therein to dispose of the Appeal No.9543/2005 within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of said order.
appearing for the respondent stating thereunder that pursuant to said direction, appeal was taken up by the Appellate Committee, which appeal was re-numbered as Appeal No.40/2019 and by order dated 25th October 2019, same has been allowed in part by setting aside the order under challenge. Hence, it is stated that there is
3
compliance of the direction issued by the writ Court. Said memo is placed on record.
In the light of appeal having been disposed of on 25th October 2019, direction issued in the writ petition stands complied with. Hence, contempt proceeding is dropped.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
bkm
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent is guilty of contempt for non-compliance with the direction in W.P.No.31544/2018.
Whether the direction issued in the writ petition stands complied with.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Shri Ramesh
Aravind Kumar
Hemant Chandangoudar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
