Disposed

Shivannagowda K v. Narasimhamurthy

Karnataka HC1 Feb 2022CCC/917/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Bengaluru disposed of contempt proceedings filed under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, against a Panchayat Development Officer for alleged disobedience of a writ order. Upon satisfaction that relief had been provided, the court dropped the proceedings. The accused was warned that revival is possible if the claimed relief is untrue.

What did the court decide?

The contempt proceedings were dropped.

Shivannagowda K Vs Narasimhamurthy — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA

¶4

AND

¶5

THE HON’BLE Mrs. JUSTICE M.G. UMA

¶6

C.C.C. No.917/2021 (CIVIL)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHIVANNAGOWDA K., AGED 65 YEARS, S/O LATE BORALINGEGOWDA, R/A VIJAYAHOSAHALLI GRAMA, B BACHAHALLI POST, BOOKANANKERE HOBLI, BACHAHALLI, MANDYA, KRISHNARAJPET, KARNATAKA-571812.

¶9

...COMPLAINANT

¶10

(BY SRI ARNAV A. BAGALWADI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

NARSIMHAMURTHY, PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICERS, BUKANAKERE VILLAG PANCHAYAT, BUKANAKERE HOBALI, K.R. PETE TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571812.

¶13

...ACCUSED

¶14

(BY SRI B.J. SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE)

¶15

¶16

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, BY THE COMPLAINANT PRAYING TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP NO.8673/2021 DATED 03.08.2021, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶17

THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, B.VEERAPPA J. , MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The complainant filed the present contempt petition under the provisions of Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 praying to take action against the accused for willful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 03.08.2021 made in Writ Petition No.8673/2021, wherein the learned Single Judge of this Court while disposing off the writ petition, has passed the following order:

¶20

"A mandamus is issued to the fourth respondent - Panchayath Development Officer, who shall in the next eight weeks pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, on the representations submitted on 10.06.2020,

¶21

¶22

03.01.2021 and 03.04.2021, without brooking any delay."

¶23

Sri B.J. Somayaji, learned counsel appearing for the accused - Panchayat Development Officer, on instructions submits that in pursuance of the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, the accused - Panchayath Development passed the resolution on 29.9.2021 and water supply and Sewerage connection was given to the complainant's house on 19.11.2021.

¶24

The said statement made by Sri B.J. Somayaji, learned counsel appearing for the accused - Panchayat Development Officer, on instructions, is placed on record.

¶25

In view of the above, we pass the following:

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

i) The Contempt proceedings are hereby dropped .

¶28

¶29

ii) However, it is made clear that if the statement made by the learned counsel for the accused is wrong and in the event, the accused - Panchayath Development Officer has not passed resolution and Water supply & Sewerage connection not given to the complainant's house, it is always open for the complainant to file an application for revival of this order. In that event, the Court will take serious view of the matter and the accused has to face the consequences.

¶30

Sd/JUDGE

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

Gss*

Shivannagowda K v. Narasimhamurthy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivannagowda K v. Narasimhamurthy

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

The Registrar General Vs Smt. Salamma Raju

Moodalagiri Gowda K T Vs State of Karnataka

Iliyas Pasha Vs the State of Karnataka

M Nagaraju Vs State of Karnataka

Sri G a Sudarshan Vs Mr Prakash

Senthil Vs State of Karnataka