Smt Susheelamma Vs the State of Karnataka — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

Smt Susheelamma Vs the State of Karnataka — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt action not initiated; respondents directed to comply with paragraph 3 of the order dated 25.07.2024 in W.P.No.18867 of 2024 within six weeks.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents/accused committed willful disobedience/contempt of the direction in paragraph 3 of the order dated 25.07.2024 in W.P.No.18867 of 2024, given that no time limit for compliance was prescribed therein.

Court's answer

Since no time limit for compliance was prescribed in the Single Judge's direction made the subject matter of contempt, the Court cannot conclude at this stage that willful contempt was committed by any of the respondents.

Ratio / Principle

The directions of the Court should not go uncomplied with; what was directed in paragraph 3 of the order dated 25.07.2024 quoted above shall be complied with within six weeks.

Key takeaways

With the aforesaid observation, the contempt petition is not entertained and is accordingly disposed of.ratio¶44

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Contempt Petition No. 1237 of 2024 filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India, alleging willful disobedience of the direction in paragraph 3 of the order dated 25.07.2024 passed by a learned Single Judge in W.P.No.18867 of 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR), whereby the petitioner was permitted to make an online application and the respondent-authority was to consider it in accordance with law, expeditiously. The Division Bench (Chief Justice N. V. Anjaria and Justice M. I. Arun) recorded that the complainant's advocate did not dispute that no time limit for compliance was prescribed in that direction, and held that at that stage it was not possible to conclude that willful contempt had been committed by any of the respondents. Observing that the directions of the Court should not go uncomplied with, the Court directed that what was directed in paragraph 3 of the order dated 25.07.2024 be complied with within six weeks. With this observation, the contempt petition was not entertained and was disposed of.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:3319-DB CCC No. 1237 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

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

AND

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 1237 OF 2024

BETWEEN:

SMT. SUSHEELAMMA D/O. PILLAMUNIYAPPA W/O. NARAYANA REDDY AGED ABOUT 89 YEARS NO.210, PARAVATHI NAGAR CHIKKANAHALLI ROAD ATTIBELE BENGALURU-562 107.

Digitally signed by H K HEMA Location: High Court of Karnataka

…COMPLAINANT

(BY SRI R.B. SADASIVAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI P. SHIVAMURTHY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001.

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:3319-DB CCC No. 1237 of 2024

SRI JAGADEESH

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE KEMPEGOWDA ROAD BEHIND KANDAYA BHAVANA BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU-560 009.

SMT. APOORVA BIDARI THE ASST. COMMISSIONER SOUTH DIVISION KEMPEGOWDA ROAD KANDAYA BHAVAN BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU-560 009.

SRI SRINIVAS THE TAHASILDAR SOUTH DIVISION KEMPEGOWDA ROAD BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU-560 009.

SRI KUSUMALATA THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS

REVENUE SURVEY OFFICE 1ST CROSS K.R. CIRLCE BANGALORE-560 001.

SRI SRIKANTHA THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS

REVENUE SURVEY OFFICE

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:3319-DB CCC No. 1237 of 2024

1ST CROSS K.R. CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 001.

…ACCUSED

(BY SRI K.S. HARISH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO INITIATE AND TAKE CONTEMPT ACTION BY FRAMING THE CHARGE AGAINST THE RESPONDENT / ACCUSED FOR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE AND COMMITTING CONTEMPT OF THE ORDER DATED 25.07.2024 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.18867 OF 2024 (KLR-RR/SUR); VIDE ANNEXURE-'A', ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:3319-DB CCC No. 1237 of 2024

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)

Learned advocate for the complainant is not in a position to dispute the position that in the following direction of learned Single Judge which is made the subject matter of contempt, any time limit for compliance is not prescribed,

"3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and taking note of the factual aspects on record, petitioner is permitted to make application through online to the competent authority. In the event of such an application made by the petitioner, same shall be considered by the respondent - authority, in accordance with law, expeditiously."

In that view, at this stage, it is not possible for the Court to conclude that there is willful contempt committed by any of the respondents.

At the same time, the directions of the Court should not go uncomplied with.

It is therefore provided that what was directed in paragraph 3 of the order dated 25.07.2024 quoted above shall be complied with within six weeks from today.

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:3319-DB CCC No. 1237 of 2024

5. With the aforesaid observation, the contempt petition is not

entertained. It is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

VMB

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2