In this civil contempt petition, the court examined allegations of willful disobedience. Finding that the accused had tendered an apology and complied with the order within a delayed timeframe due to electoral duties, the court dropped the proceedings.
Contempt proceedings against the accused are dropped.
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.
CCC No. 1689 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K. S. HEMALEKHA
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.1689 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
W/O D M KRISHNARAJU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.4,
13TH B MAIN ROAD,
18TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU-560 055.
…COMPLAINANT
(BY MS. KEERTHANA, ADV., FOR SRI YESHU MISHRA)
AND:
…ACCUSED
Digitally signed by USHA NAGENAHALLI SHANMUKHAPPA Location: High Court of Karnataka
(BY SRI N K RAMESH, ADVOCATE)
THIS C.C.C. IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, BY THE COMPLAINANT, WHEREIN SHE PRAYS THAT THE HON'BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR HAVING DISOBEYED THE ORDERS OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION NO.44469 OF 2017 DATED 19-3-2018.
CCC No. 1689 of 2018
THIS C.C.C. IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, B. VEERAPPA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
The complainant has filed the present contempt petition under the provisions of Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to take action against the accused for willful disobedience of the order dated 19-3-2018 passed in Writ Petition No.44469 of 2017 (LB-RES), wherein the learned Single Judge while disposing of the writ petition directed respondent No.4-Assistant Revenue Officer to consider the representation of the petitioner at Annexures-L and M to the writ petition in an expedite manner in any event not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of that order and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
accused, has filed counter affidavit of Sri T. Ramadas, Assistant Revenue Officer, Mattikere Sub-Division, B.B.M.P., Bengaluru, wherein at paragraph No.4, he has stated as under:
"4. I respectfully submit that the copy of the order passed by this Hon'ble Court was furnished by the complainant on 31.3.2018. As the file pertaining to
CCC No. 1689 of 2018
the property in dispute was sent to the Special Commissioner (Estates), BBMP, the file was not readily available in my Office. Further, I was appointed as Asst. Returning Officer for the Elections held for Legislative Assembly and was deputed for Election duty. On account of this there was delay in taking a decision in the matter. This was duly intimated to the complainant vide endorsement dated 3.5.2018. Thereupon after the completion of the Election process, the file was secured and the request of the complainant was considered and as per the note of the Joint Commissioner dated 22.6.2018, stating that since in the property Register of the BBMP, the khatha is recorded in name of CITB and hence the complainant is directed to furnish the report from the BDA and also City Survey Department with regard to the extent of land and thereafter the application for change of Khatha will be taken up for consideration in accordance with law. An endorsement dated 30.7.2018 is this regard was sent to the complainant by Registered Post. True copy of the said Endorsement along with the Postal Receipt is produced herewith for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. Owing to the reasons mentioned above, there is slight delay in complying with the order within 4 weeks time. The delay is not
CCC No. 1689 of 2018
intentional but for the bonafide reasons stated supra. I regret for the same. I have great respect for the Orders passed by the Courts. The lapse on my part is not deliberate. I tender my unconditional apology to this Hon'ble Court for the delay in implementing the Order and seek pardon of this Hon'ble Court with an assurance that I will not give room to such lapse in future."
issued on 30-7-2018 and thereby, the order passed by the learned Single Judge has been complied with.
ORDER
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
KVK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether contempt proceedings against an accused for non-compliance within a specified time limit should be maintained given the finding that the order was eventually complied with and an apology was t
1 provisions across 1 enactments
B. VEERAPPA
K. S. HEMALEKHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
