Disposed

Thirupathi Security Agency v. Mr Maj. Gen. M.K. Sagoch

Karnataka HC4 Feb 2021CCC/359/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt complaint filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for alleged disobedience of an interim order. Accused submitted a memo confirming compliance and apologized for the delay and absence. The court accepted the apology and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of upon acceptance of the accused's apology for delay and absence.

Thirupathi Security Agency Vs Mr Maj. Gen. M.K. Sagoch — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

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

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶7

C.C.C NO.359 OF 2020 (CIVIL)

¶8

BETWEEN: THIRUPATHI SECURITY AGENCY REGD. OFFICE AT 165 CHIKKATHOGUR ROAD OPP. DS MAX APT. OFF HOSUR MAIN ROAD ELECTRONIC CITY POST BENGALURU – 560 100 T. THIRUPATHI AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS (BY SHRI THOMAS DEVAPRIYA, ADVOCATE FOR SHRI GANGADHARAIAH A.N., ADVOCATE)

¶9

... COMPLAINANT

¶10

AND: MR. MAJ. GEN.M.K.SAGOCH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS DIRECTOR GENERAL RESETTLEMENT DEPARTMENT OF EX-SERVICEMEN MINISTRY OF DEFENCE R.K.PURAM, NEW DELHI

¶11

... ACCUSED ---

¶12

(BY SHRI M.B.NARGUND, ADDITIONAL SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR SHRI C.SHASHIKANTHA, ASG)

¶13

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE CONTEMPTUOUS ACT COMMITTED BY THE ACCUSED BY DISOBEYING THE INTERIM ORDER GRANTED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION No.7391/2019 DATED 22.04.2019 AND PUNISH THEM WITH IMPRISONMENT ALONG WITH PENALTY AND ETC.

¶14

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

¶15

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the complainant and the learned Additional Solicitor General of India appearing for the accused, who is present through video conferencing.

¶18

A memo is tendered by the accused of today’s date. In paragraph 2 of the memo, the compliance has been reported and in fact, by an email dated 20^th January 2021, the complainant has been informed that the name of the complainant has been included in the list of DGR Empanelled Security Agencies for the State of Karnataka. The status update of DGR Empanelled Security Agencies for the State of Karnataka annexed as Document No.1 shows the name of the complainant at item No.3. The accused has tendered an apology for the delay and for remaining absent.

¶19

By accepting the apology, the petition is disposed of.

¶20

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

¶21

Sd/JUDGE

¶22

AHB

Thirupathi Security Agency v. Mr Maj. Gen. M.K. Sagoch

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thirupathi Security Agency v. Mr Maj. Gen. M.K. Sagoch

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Mallikarjunaiah B M Vs Sri Bhaskar Rao

Smt. Sujatha N G Vs Sri B G Srinivasa Prasad

Rajani Kulkarni Vs M/S. Diaamond Granites

Anand Doddamani Vs the State of Karnataka

B K Ismail Vs Rajendra Kumar K v

Shri Manoo Urs Vs the 'a' Kharab Determining Committee