Dismissed

Sri Gavisiddaiah v. Sri Shiva Kumar

Karnataka HC10 Oct 2023CCC/79/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Civil Contempt Petition, the High Court of Karnataka examined an allegation of willful disobedience of an order directing action under the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act. The Court noted the accused filed a reply affidavit supported by a stay order in an affiliated writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The complaint of contempt of court is disposed of without finding willful disobedience.

Sri Gavisiddaiah Vs Sri Shiva Kumar — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:36780-DB CCC No. 79 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 10^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. 79 OF 2023

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SRI. GAVISIDDAIAH, S/O SRI MANCHIAH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, 404, 3^RD CROSS, JANATHA COLONY, YERAGANAHALLI, MYSORE-570 029.

¶12

SRI. GURUSWAMY, S/O MOGANNA, AGED ABOUT 325 YEARS, 404, 3^RD CROSS, JANATHA COLONY, YERAGANAHALLI, MYSORE-570 029.

¶13

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

¶14

(BY SRI. NISHAN UNNI P.,ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

…COMPLAINANTS

¶17

SRI. SHIVA KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, ASST COMMISSIONER, MYSORE MAHANAGAR PALIKE, ZONAL COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE, ZONAL OFFICE NO.9, GAYATHIRPURAM, MYSORE-570 019.

¶18

…ACCUSED

¶19

(BY MRS. GEETHA DEVI M P.,ADVOCATE)

¶20

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:36780-DB CCC No. 79 of 2023

¶21

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACTS, 1971 PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS FOR WILLFULLY VIOLATING DIRECTION OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.12504/2021 (LB-RES) AND PUNISH HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

This complaint is alleging violation of a learned Single Judge’s order dated 09.09.2022 read with modified order dated 27.10.2022 made in the pending W.P No.12504/2021. Paragraphs 7 & 8 of the main order reads as under:

¶25

“7. In view of the above, petition stands disposed of directing respondent No.3 to take appropriate action against private respondents. If it is found that the construction put up by the said respondents is without obtaining building license as specified under Section 321 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, such exercise shall be concluded within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy this order.

¶26

8. Respondent No.3 shall commence initiation of action under Section 321 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. All contentions including the jurisdiction of respondent No.3

¶27

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:36780-DB CCC No. 79 of 2023

¶28

to take action against private respondents is kept open.”

¶29

After service of notice, the respondent/accused having entered appearance through his counsel and filed the reply affidavit dated 10.06.2023 explaining the steps taken towards compliance of the writ as modified by the subsequent order made by the learned Single Judge. At para 6, he states that the construction of the subject structures was done “more than 25-30 years ago”; during the said period the said areas were not within the jurisdictional limits of the City Corporation. He has meticulously explained about the herculean task being endeavour to be accomplished but, as to why the same cannot be done. As a consequence, he expresses the inability of the Corporation in terms of Section 321 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976.

¶30

At paragraphs 8 & 9 of the affidavit, he has sincerely

¶31

said as under:

¶32

“8. No person have filed any application for grant of deemed license as mentioned in Para No.9 of order of this Hon’ble court dated 09.09.2022 in W.P.No.12504 of 2021.

¶33

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:36780-DB CCC No. 79 of 2023

¶34

9. Smt. Geetha and Smt. Janakamma and Sri, Chikkamadayya have filed a writ petition before this Hon’ble Court in W.P.No. 9029 of 2023 challenging the notices issued by the Corporation pursuant to the directions of this Hon’ble Court in WP No.12504 of 2021. This Hon’ble Court was pleased to stay all the further proceedings of the notice dated 19-072023. True copy of the interim order dated 19-04-2023 is herewith produced and marked as Annexure-R13.”

¶35

He has also produced a copy of the interim order granted by another learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P No.9029/2023 (LB-RES), whereby the coercive notices dated 15.04.2023 issued by the Corporation have been stayed and the writ petition is still pending.

¶36

In view of the above, we are of the considered

¶37

opinion that there is no case of willful disobedience of the Court order and therefore, this complaint of contempt is accordingly disposed off.

¶38

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

¶39

Sd/JUDGE

¶40

Snb/AHB

Sri Gavisiddaiah v. Sri Shiva Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Gavisiddaiah v. Sri Shiva Kumar

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

Smt Shahnawaz Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Ravi Vs Hassan Urban Development Authority

Sri Chikkachannappa Vs Dr. Ajay Nagabhushan M.N.

Sqd. Ldr. Dr. Praveen Kumar Bourshetty Vs Mrs. Vineetha Thomas

M/S Divyajyothi Vidya Kendra Vs Karnataka Housing Board

Mysore Mercantile Company Limited Vs State of Karnataka