Disposed

Jayadeva S P v. Rajashekara

Karnataka HC27 Oct 2023CCC/328/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This contempt petition regarding alleged violation of an interim injunction dated 29.01.2021 was dismissed. The bench held that contempt jurisdiction is not available as a matter of course when the complainant has an alternate efficacious remedy under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the CPC.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings disposed of; complainant given liberty to avail alternative remedy under Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC.

Jayadeva S P Vs Rajashekara — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:38109-DB CCC No. 328 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶9

CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 328 OF 2023

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

JAYADEVA S P, S/O LATE S PRABHAKAR, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT TEMPLE ROAD, TALAGUPPA, SAGARA TALUK 577 401. SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

¶12

…COMPLAINANT

¶13

(BY SRI. UMESH MOOLIMANI., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S V PRAKASH.,ADVOCATE)

¶14

Digitally signed by SHARADA VANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

AND:

¶16

RAJASHEKARA, S/O DURGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT B H ROAD, THALAGUPPA, SAGARA TALUK 577 401. SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

¶17

RAVISHANKAR HIREMATH S/O SRI IRAYYA HIREMATH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT THALAGUPPA, SAGAR TALUK 577 401. SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

¶18

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:38109-DB CCC No. 328 of 2023

¶19

SMT. VIDYA, W/O RAVISHANKAR HIREMATH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT THALGUPPA, SAGARA TALUK 577 401. SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

¶20

…ACCUSED

¶21

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 PRAYING TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT FOR HAVING DISOBEYED THE ORDER DATED 21.01.2021 GRANTED BY THIS HONBLE COURT ON IA.NO.1/2018 IN RSA.NO.2039-2018 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE A TO THIS CONTEMPT PETITION AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR WILLFUL AND DELIBERATE DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER OF TEMPORARY INJUNCTION GRANTED BY THIS HONBLE COURT ON IA.NO.1/2018 IN RSA NO.2039/2018 DATED 29.01.2021 BY ALLOWING THIS CONTEMPT PETITION.

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

This complaint alleges violation of the interim order dated 29.01.2021 granted by a learned Single Judge of this Court on I.A.No.1/2018 in his pending R.S.A.No.2039/2018 whereby the respondents have been injuncted from interfering with the ‘suit schedule properties’.

¶25

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:38109-DB CCC No. 328 of 2023

¶26

Learned counsel for the Complainant submits

¶27

that in view of prima facie violation/non-compliance of the subject order of the court, all the accused be summoned and tried for the offence punishable under Sections 11 & 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

¶28

Having heard the counsel for the Complainant and having perused the complaint papers, we decline indulgence in the matter inasmuch as the subject ad interim order, if violated it is open to the complainant to take up punitive proceedings as provided under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

¶29

Ordinarily, contempt jurisdiction under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 cannot be invoked, as a matter of course, subject to all just exceptions, into which argued case of the Complainant does not fit. Thus, there is an alternate & equally efficacious remedy which the can avail in accordance with law. In that connection, all contentions need to be kept intact. No special circumstances are demonstrated as to

¶30

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:38109-DB CCC No. 328 of 2023

¶31

why the Complainant should be permitted to invoke the

¶32

statutory contempt jurisdiction.

¶33

In the above circumstances, these proceedings are disposed off with liberty to the Complainant as indicated above.

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

Bsv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9

Jayadeva S P v. Rajashekara

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayadeva S P v. Rajashekara

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri a. Lakshmipathy Vs Smt. Vanditha Sharma

M P Lakshmi Narayana Reddy Vs Sri Ravi

Sri Manjunath Yellappa Timmapur Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Nayazuddin Vs State of Karnataka

Mahesh G S Vs State of Karnataka

Smt K S Arpitha Vs State of Karnataka