Disposed

Gurappa v. Mr Dayanand

Karnataka HC5 Jun 2024CCC/220/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Complainants sought contempt proceedings alleging non-compliance with a Single Judge's order directing the Deputy Commissioner to decide their representation within eight weeks. The State produced an endorsement dated 06.03.2024 showing a decision was taken; the court held the directions complied with and closed the proceedings, leaving merits open to independent challenge.

What the court decided

AI extract

Gurappa Vs Mr Dayanand — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:19274-DB CCC No. 220 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND CCC No. 220 OF 2024 (CIVIL)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

GURAPPA S/O. LATE MUNISWAMY AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS R/AT MULLUR VILLAGE

¶7

VARTHUR HOBLI

¶8

BANGALORE EAST TALUK BANGALORE – 560 035.

¶9

NANJAPPA, (WAS GRANTEE AND HE WAS PARTY TO EARLIER PROCEEDINGS) S/O MUNISHAMI SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LEGAL HEIRS

¶10

Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

SAMPATH KUMAR N. S/O. LATE NANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,

¶12

SUMITHRA N. D/O. LATE NANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

¶13

BOTH COMPLAINANT No.2 AND 3 ARE R/AT MULLUR VILLAGE VARTHUR HOBLI BANGALORE EAST TALUK BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT – 560 035.

¶14

…COMPLAINANTS

¶15

(BY SRI BYRE REDDY M S., ADVOCATE)

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:19274-DB CCC No. 220 of 2024

¶18

AND:

¶19

MR. DAYANAND THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT NEAR CAUVERY BHAVAN BANGALORE – 560 002.

¶20

STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶21

…ACCUSED

¶22

(BY SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN., AGA)

¶23

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, BY THE COMPLAINANT PRAYING TO INITIATE PROSECUTION AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE DIRECTIONS OF THIS HON'BLE COURT VIDE ORDER DATED 16.11.2023 PASSED BY HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION No.20421/2022 (KLR-RES) AND SENTENCE HIM FOR OFFENCE OF CONTEMPT OF COURT.

¶24

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

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Following were the directions in the order dated 16.11.2023 of learned Single Judge, which are sought to be complied with, in the present contempt application,

¶27

“Accordingly, petitioners are directed to make representation to the respondent No.4 herein, within two

¶28

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:19274-DB CCC No. 220 of 2024

¶30

weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. If such an application is made, respondent No.4 is directed to consider the same in terms of the observation made hereinabove, pass orders in accordance with law, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of such application.

¶31

Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.”

¶32

Thus, as per the above directions, the representation was required to be decided by the competent authority that is, respondent No.4-the Deputy Commissioner Bengaluru Urban District.

¶33

When the contempt proceedings came up for the consideration today, learned Additional Government Advocate Smt. Pramodhini Kishan stated that the decision in compliance with the directions as above has already been taken. In this regard, she produced the copy of the endorsement/order dated 06.03.2024. It reflects a decision having been taken.

¶34

In the aforesaid view, it could be well said that the directions are complied with.

¶35

Although, learned advocate Mr.M.S.Byre Reddy for the complainants submits that the decision was required to be taken in accordance with the observations made in the order and that such part is not observed, such submission travels in the realm of merit of the order.

¶36

Since there is compliance of the direction by taking a decision, this contempt application is required to be closed.

¶37

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC:19274-DB CCC No. 220 of 2024

¶39

However, it is observed that if the complainants have any grievance about the merits of the decision, it is always open for them to institute independent proceedings to challenge the same in accordance with law and on its merits in respect of which, however, this court does not express any opinion.

¶40

The present contempt proceedings accordingly does not survive and are disposed of.

¶41

The aforesaid decision dated 06.03.2024 shall remain on record, a copy of which is also given to learned advocate for the complainants.

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/JUDGE

DDU

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

Gurappa v. Mr Dayanand

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Gurappa v. Mr Dayanand

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Manakchand Salecha Vs Sri Manakchand Kothari

Sri M Prakash Vs State of Karnataka

Eshwarappa S Hullalli Vs State of Karnataka

Alamengada M. Bose Mandanna Vs Smt. B. D. Dhanalakshmi

Sri Ravi Kumar K v Vs the Union of India

Kishore Kumar Bolar Vs Smt. Shubha