Disposed

Sri Shivarudraiah v. S v Sri H.R. Mahadev

Karnataka HC8 Jan 2021CCC/509/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chief Justice disposed of a contempt petition filed for alleged delay in complying with an order dated 04/22/2019. Despite initial defiance, the accused later filed an unconditional apology and endorsement committing to allot an alternative site. The court discharged the contempt notice but imposed costs of Rs. 10,000.

What did the court decide?

Notice discharged; contingent on payment of costs quantified at Rs. 10,000/- one month

Sri Shivarudraiah v S Vs Sri H.R. Mahadev — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

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

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶7

C.C.C NO.509 OF 2020 (CIVIL)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI SHIVARUDRAIAH V.S S/O LATE S.A.SAVANDAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT 305, 9^TH CROSS BAPUJI LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGARA BENGALURU – 560 040

¶10

... COMPLAINANT

¶11

(BY SHRI H.MOHAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

SRI H.R.MAHADEV COMMISSIONER

¶14

BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

¶15

KUMARA PARK WEST

¶16

BENGALURU – 560 020

¶17

DR.BASANTHI

¶18

THE ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

¶19

BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

¶20

KUMARA PARK WEST

¶21

BENGALURU – 560 020

¶22

... ACCUSED

¶23

(BY SHRI K.KRISHNA, ADVOCATE)

¶24

¶25

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 PRAYING TO PUNISH THE RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED FOR HAVING DELIBERATELY AND INTENTIONALLY DISOBEYED THE ORDER DATED 22.04.2019 IN WRIT PETITION No.9854/2019 (BDA) PASSED BY THE HON’BLE SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶26

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

¶27

¶28

ORDER

¶29

The breach alleged is of the directions contained in paragraphs 4 and 5 of the order dated 22^nd April 2019. Time of 12 weeks was granted to the accused to take a decision from the date on which a certified copy of the said order is received.

¶30

After notice of the contempt was issued, an affidavit was filed by the accused No.2 enclosing therewith an endorsement dated 2^nd December 2020. By the said endorsement, the accused No.2 refused to decide the claim of the complainant. Now, an additional affidavit is filed by the accused No.2 tendering an unconditional apology and annexing a copy of a fresh endorsement dated 11^th December 2020. By the fresh endorsement, the complainant is held entitled for allotment of an alternative site. It is stated that the allotment will be made only after disposal of the pending writ appeal referred therein.

¶31

Firstly, there is a gross delay in implementing the order dated 22^nd April 2019. Secondly, even after filing of the contempt petition, the accused No.2 showed defiance by issuing an endorsement declining to decide the case of the complainant. Now, the accused by passing a fresh endorsement held that the complainant is entitled to allotment

¶32

¶33

of a site. The accused No.2 has tendered an apology for the delay.

¶34

In view of belated compliance, though further proceeding deserves to be dropped, considering the conduct of the accused, they will have to be saddled with costs quantified at Rs.10,000/-.

¶35

Accordingly, the notice issued to the accused is discharged. The contempt petition is disposed of subject to the condition that the respondents/accused shall pay costs quantified at Rs.10,000/- to the complainant within a period of one month from today.

¶36

Though the petition is disposed of, for reporting compliance regarding payment of costs, the same shall be listed on 12^th February 2021 under the caption of ‘Orders’.

¶37

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

¶38

Sd/JUDGE

¶39

AHB

Sri Shivarudraiah v. S v Sri H.R. Mahadev

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Shivarudraiah v. S v Sri H.R. Mahadev

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mineral Enterprises Limited Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Mathew Thomas Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Mantri Espana Residential Apartment Owners Association Vs the Regional Officer

Sri Parvatheesha B Vs Sri H.R. Mahadev

Smt. Sandhya Arun Vs Sri H.R. Mahadev

Sri Arun Shivaram Vs Sri H.R.Mahadev