Disposed

Smt Giddamma v. Sri Ramesh

Karnataka HC21 Mar 2024CCC/65/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A civil contempt petition alleging non-compliance with an order directing the Urban Development Authority to consider a representation for site allotment. Finding no willful contempt, as the authority was not a party to the writ petition and sought documents before deciding, the court closed the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings closed; complainant to supply documents within ten days, after which the Authority shall pass an order in accordance with law; liberty reserved for further proceedings.

Smt Giddamma Vs Sri Ramesh — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:11705-DB CCC No. 65 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶9

CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 65 OF 2023

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

Digitally signed by CHETAN B C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SMT. GIDDAMMA, W/O LATE HONNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, R/AT PARASMAL NEAR YELLAMMA TEMPLE, OPP SRI. LAKSHMI GRAPHICS, HASSAN - 573 201. SINCE DEAD BY HER LR: SRI .LAKSHMEESHA S S/O SRI. SATHYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.775, EWS, 19^TH CROSS, KUVEMPU NAGARA, HOUSING BOARD, HASSAN - 573 201. …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. H.S. KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VASANTH KUMAR H.T., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

SRI. RAMESH, THE COMMISSIONER, HASSAN URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUHTORITY, HASSAN - 575 201.

¶15

…ACCUSED

¶16

(BY SRI. A. RAVISHANKAR.,ADVOCATE)

¶17

¶18

NC: 2024:KHC:11705-DB CCC No. 65 of 2023

¶19

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO SECURE THE ACCUSED HEREIN, INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS FOR NON-COMPLIANCE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P.NO.18470/2021 DATED 11.10.2022 VIDE ANNEXUREA, AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT.

¶20

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

¶21

ORDER

¶22

These contempt proceedings arise from order dated 11.10.2022 of learned Singe Judge whereby learned Singe Judge directed respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 25.08.2021 in relation to allotment of site to the petitioner.

¶23

While the non-compliance of aforesaid directions is alleged

¶24

by the complainant, in the affidavit filed by the accused, there figures a communication dated 06.02.2023 from the Urban Development Authority addressed to the petitioner.

¶25

In that, it is mentioned that in the writ petition, wherein the order was passed, the authority was not a party. Therefore, the authority would need certain documents and information relating to the case of the petitioner on the basis of which the decision on the representation could be taken and the directions of learned Singe Judge could be complied with.

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:11705-DB CCC No. 65 of 2023

¶27

In the aforesaid circumstances, the court does not think that

¶28

there is any willful contempt committed by the accused.

¶29

At this stage, learned advocate Mr.H.S.Kumar, for learned advocate Mr.Vasanth Kumar H.T., for the complainant submits that he will supply the necessary documents as may be required by the authority within ten days from today.

¶30

Upon the documents and the information supplied, the competent authority of the Urban Development Authority shall pass the necessary order, in accordance with law, which will amount to compliance of the orders of the learned Single Judge.

¶31

6.1. Liberty is reserved for the complainant to institute the appropriate proceedings if the complainant is not satisfied with the decision which may be rendered.

¶32

The contempt proceedings are closed accordingly.

Sd/CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

cbc

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21

Smt Giddamma v. Sri Ramesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Giddamma v. Sri Ramesh

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 Kalavathi Vs Sri N Jayaram

Smt. Jayamma Vs Sri. C. R. Shiva Kumar

Sri. B K Shankaregowda Vs the State of Karnataka

C Ravish Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Late Venkatamma Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Manjunath Vs Smt.Sathidevi