Dismissed

Sri. Bhaskar Rao. K v. Mr. Abhilash M. M.

Karnataka HC29 Nov 2023CCC/768/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This civil contempt petition was dismissed in limine. The court held that the alleged violation involved an interim stay order, the underlying writ was withdrawn merging the interim with the final order, and the impugned work order date differed from the court order, negating willful disobedience.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings dismissed in limine due to lack of willful disobedience and merger of orders.

Sri. Bhaskar Rao. K Vs Mr. Abhilash M. M. — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:43111-DB CCC No. 768 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 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. 768 OF 2023

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SRI. BHASKAR RAO. K S/O SATHYANARAYANA K, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.55, 9^TH MAIN, AD BLOCK, SRIRAMPURAM, BENGALURU-560 021.

¶12

…COMPLAINANT

¶13

(BY SRI. VIJAY SHETTY B.,ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

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

¶16

MR. ABHILASH M. M. WORKING AS THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BBMP, SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT CELL, BBMP WARD NO.110, SHIVAJINAGAR DIVISION, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶17

…ACCUSED

¶18

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE

¶19

CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT 1971, PRAYING TO i) INITIATE AND TAKE CONTEMPT ACTION BY FRAMING THE CHARGE AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE AND

¶20

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:43111-DB CCC No. 768 of 2023

¶21

COMMITTING CONTEMPT OF THE COURT ORDER IN W.P.NO.14513/2022 (LB-BMP), DATED 01.08.2022 AND SUBSEQUENT ORDERS OF EXTENDING THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED BY THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Though the complainant is before this court by filing the present complaint of contempt with an allegation that the respondent had willfully disobeyed the order of learned Single Judge dated 01.08.2022, we are not satisfied with

¶25

the so called grievance raised for more than one reason. The grievance is in respect of an order placed on record at page 14.

¶26

Firstly, the above order dated 01.08.2022 whose violation is complained of was is an interim order whereby the learned Single Judge had stayed the proceedings pursuant to the order dated 15.07.2022 passed by 3^rd

¶27

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:43111-DB CCC No. 768 of 2023

¶28

respondent at Annexure-A, till next date of hearing. On enquiry as to whether the said order is placed on record, the learned counsel invited our attention to Annexure-H and its translated copy. A bare perusal of these documents shows that its only a work order which is dated 16.07.2022. The caption of the document is also ‘Annexure-H’. Thus, there is a glaring difference between the date mentioned in the court order dated 01.08.2022 and the one appearing on the face of Annexure-H which is referred to in the said order.

¶29

Secondly, the learned counsel for the complainant fairly submits that his client’s case in W.P.No.14513/2022 that was pending before the learned Single Judge itself has been disposed off as having been withdrawn. As a consequence, the interim order merges with the final order and that the final order is not a coercive one.

¶30

In the above circumstances, the we are convinced that there is no case of willful disobedience of the subject

¶31

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:43111-DB CCC No. 768 of 2023

¶32

interim order and therefore these proceedings are liable to

¶33

be dismissed in limine.

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

Snb/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11

Sri. Bhaskar Rao. K v. Mr. Abhilash M. M.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Bhaskar Rao. K v. Mr. Abhilash M. M.

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

Sri Pabba Reddy Kodandarami Reddy Vs M/S Upkar Residences Pvt. Ltd.

Srirupa Roy Vs Lalit Kumar

Bengaluru Rakshana Sangha (R) Vs Rajarajeshwari Buildcon Pvt. Ltd.

Sri Raja Vs the Secretary

Sri. D. K. Shivakumar Vs State of Karnataka

Snehasangama Sports and Social Trust Vs Rahul Kumar Shapur Vad