Dismissed

Shri Basavaraj Purad v. the Chief Engineer

Karnataka HC6 Jun 2024CCC/100126/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Civil Contempt Petition filed for alleged disobedience of a court order directing payment of a contract balance, the Court found that the accused had determined and forwarded the amount. Finding no willful disobedience, the Court dropped further proceedings in the contempt matter.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in the present contempt petition are dropped as there is no willful and deliberate disobedience.

Shri Basavaraj Purad Vs the Chief Engineer — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7566-DB CCC No. 100126 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S G PANDIT

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.100126 OF 2024

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHRI BASAVARAJ PURAD S/O. MANOHAR PURAD, AGE. 59 YEARS, OCC. CLASS 1 CONTRACTOR, R/O. VARUN NILAYA GANDINAGAR, KOPPAL, TQ. AND DIST. KOPPAL-583231.

¶9

…COMPLAINANT

¶10

(BY SMT. VIDYAVATI M.KOTTURSHETTAR, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE CHIEF ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGH WAY DIVISION, K. R. CIRCLE, BANGALURU-560001. C. MANJAPPA, OFFICE OF CHIEF ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGH WAY NORTH ZONE, SUVARNA SOUDHA, BELAGAVI-590020.

¶14

(PRESENTLY THE FIRST ACCUSED OFFICE IS BIFURCATED AND SITUATED AT BELAGAVI)

¶15

NARENDRA SHARMA, THE REGIONAL OFFICER, (CIVIL) MORT AND H, BENGALURU, K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560001.

¶16

RAVINDRANATH, THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER (DESIGNS)

¶17

N.H. ZONE, K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560001.

¶18

- 2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7566-DB CCC No. 100126 of 2024

¶19

SHIVANAND NAYAK, SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY CIRCLE, DHARWAD-580008.

¶20

H. G. GUNDALLI, THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGH DIVISION, VISHVESHWARA NAGAR, HUBBALLI-580032.

¶21

H.G. GUNDALLI, THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGH DIVISION, VIJAYPURA-586101.

¶22

(PRESENTLY THIS OFFICE IS SHIFTED TO HUBBALLI THAT IS ACCUSED NO.5)

¶23

M. KRISHNAMURTHY, THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HIGH SUB DIVISION, TQ. YELBURGA, DIST. KOPPAL-583236.

¶24

THE LEARNED A.A.G. STATE OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD-580011.

¶25

…ACCUSED

¶26

(BY SRI G.K. HIREGOUDAR, GOVT. ADV. FOR A1 TO A3 AND A5 TO A7; NOTICE TO A4 SERVED)

¶27

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, R/W. ARTICLE 215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950, PLEASED TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AGAINST ACCUSED HEREIN FOR DISOBEYING THE ORDER OF THIS HON’BLE COURT DATED 31.01.2024 IN W.P.NO.103585/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,

¶28

THIS CCC, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, S G PANDIT, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

- 3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7566-DB CCC No. 100126 of 2024

¶30

ORDER

¶31

The complainant is before this Court under Sections 11

¶32

and 12 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 complaining disobedience of order dated 31.01.2024 passed in Writ Petition No.103585/2023 wherein, the learned Single Judge of this Court passed the following order:

¶33

“In the present matter, even the adjudication through an arbitrator has been sought to be frustrated by the respondents by non co-operation and the arbitrators themselves withdrawing the consent. This speaks very poorly of the State that an arbitrator had to withdraw the consent on account of non co-operation by the State. In that view of the matter, I pass the following:

¶34

ORDER

¶35

i) Writ petition is allowed. ii) The respondents are directed to determine the balance amount payable to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and make payment of such determined amount within a period of four weeks thereafter.

¶36

iii) In the event the petitioner not being satisfied with the payments made, the petitioner would always have a liberty to file a suit or seek for resolution of dispute by way of arbitration in terms of the contract.

¶37

iv) The respondent No.1 is directed to implement the general directions issued in paragraph 19 of the order dated 27.09.2023 in W.P.No.7725/2023 in respect of all contracts issued by respondent No.1 in the State of Karnataka.

¶38

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7566-DB CCC No. 100126 of 2024

¶39

v) Though the above matter is disposed, to report compliance with above directions, re-list on 06.03.2024.”

¶40

2. Heard learned counsel Smt.Vidyavati

¶41

M.Kotturshetter for the complainant and learned AGA Sri.G.K.Hiregoudar for accused No.1 to 3 and 5 to 7. Perused the contempt papers as well as the original file relating to correspondences between the complainant and accused as well as the note determining the balance amount.

¶42

3. Learned counsel for the complainant would submit that the complainant had claimed a sum of Rs.71 lakhs being the balance amount towards the contract executed as far back as on 02.01.2010. As the accused had failed to make payment, the complainant was before this Court in the aforesaid writ petition. Learned Single Judge of this Court on hearing both the sides, passed the order as extracted above. Learned counsel would submit that the accused have not determined the amount as directed by this Court and that the accused have held that the complainant

¶43

would be entitled for a sum of Rs.2,35,067/-. Learned counsel for the complainant would submit that, the accused

¶44

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7566-DB CCC No. 100126 of 2024

¶45

have not determined the amount as directed by this Court. Further, it is submitted that the complainant would be entitled for amount as claimed towards the compensation for men and machinery.

¶46

4. Per contra , learned AGA Sri.G.K.Hiregoudar would submit that the order is complied in its letter and spirit and submits that as could be seen from the documents enclosed to affidavit dated 28.05.2024 of respondent No.5 and also the documents enclosed to memo dated 06.06.2024, would indicate how the accused have determined the amount. Further, learned AGA would submit that the complainant would not be entitled for compensation as the complainant has mobilized the men and machinery even prior to handing over of the site. Learned AGA also invites attention of this Court to a direction No.3 of the order dated 31.01.2024 and submits that if the complainant is not satisfied with the payment or determination of amount by the accused person,

¶47

the complainant is at liberty to file a suit or seek for resolution of dispute by way of arbitration in terms of the

¶48

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7566-DB CCC No. 100126 of 2024

¶49

contract. Thus, he prays for dropping further proceedings in this contempt.

¶50

5. Perusal of the order passed by this Court dated 31.01.2024 in Writ Petition No.103585/2023, it is seen that at the first instance, accused are directed to determine the balance amount payable to the petitioner-complainant and thereafter, if the petitioner-complainant is not satisfied with the payments made, the petitioner-complainant is at liberty to file a suit or seek for resolution of dispute by way of arbitration in terms of the contract.

¶51

6. In the instant case, we are satisfied with the process of determination of the respondents-accused and in terms of the determination, it is submitted by learned AGA that the accused No.6 has forwarded cheque for Rs.2,36,067/- to the complainant.

¶52

7. Since the amount determined is already forwarded to the complainant through a registered post and as observed by this Court, if the complainant is not satisfied

¶53

7 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7566-DB CCC No. 100126 of 2024

¶54

with the determination, liberty is reserved to the complainant

¶55

to invoke arbitration clause as provided in the contract.

¶56

8. There is no willful and deliberate disobedience as

¶57

alleged. We do not see any reason to continue the proceedings anymore. We drop further proceedings in the present contempt proceedings.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/JUDGE

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42

Shri Basavaraj Purad v. the Chief Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Basavaraj Purad v. the Chief Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Pratibha Vs Fakrusab

Shri Sangamesh S/O Nagappa Rudagi Vs Sri Ritesh Kumar Singh

Pupil Tree Trust Foundation Vs the Commissioner of Public Instructions

Shri M M Bahavikatti Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S.Associated Mining Co. Vs the Principal Commissioner

Hanumavva W/O Gangadhar Balangoudar Vs Imamsab S/O Ganisab Joyisaraharahalli