Disposed¶84

Ex Mwo Ashok Kumar Iaf v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Oct 2025CCC/1341/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

civil contempt petition; willful disobedience; undertaking by HCGP; Tahsildar Yelahanka Upa Nagara; impugned order dated 10.01.2023; eviction only after hearing; status quo in writ appeals W.A. 1505/2024 and 1611/2024; mandamus to implement order/notice dated 10.01.2023; liberty to establish rights before civil court; O.S. No. 665 of 2007 Trial Court finding; Sainik Vihar Site/House Owners Welfare Association; Sections 11 and 12 Contempt of Courts Act 1971; Article 215 Constitution of India; contempt proceedings dropped; merits kept open; Bengaluru North Taluk; Karnataka.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings dropped; no punishment imposed; liberty reserved to the complainant to work out his remedies in accordance with law with regard to possession. ¶84

Ex Mwo Ashok Kumar Iaf Vs the State of Karnataka — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt proceedings dropped; no punishment imposed; liberty reserved to the complainant to work out his remedies in accordance with law with regard to possession.

¶84

Issue for consideration

Whether Accused Nos. 2 to 6 committed willful disobedience of the order/direction dated 23.06.2023 in W.P. No. 2074/2023 passed by this Court, warranting initiation of contempt proceedings against them. +1 more

¶36

Court's answer

In view of the interim orders in the writ appeals directing maintenance of status quo, the order of the learned Single Judge dated 23.06.2023 passed in W.P.No.2074/2023 cannot be implemented.

¶83

Ratio / Principle

No willful disobedience of the order dated 23.06.2023 in W.P.No.2074/2023 or of the undertaking recorded therein was found as alleged.

¶84

Key takeaways

The contempt proceedings are dropped, reserving liberty to the complainant to work out his remedies in accordance with law.ratio¶84
It is open to the complainant to work out his remedies in accordance with law with regard to possession.ratio¶82
Consideration of the contention that the undertaking was violated by goonda elements with the help of police, allegedly in collusion with revenue and police authorities despite the Division Bench orders, would not arise in view of the interim order in the writ appeal and cannot be gone into in the present proceedings.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Contempt Petition CCC No. 1341 of 2024 (Sections 11 & 12, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 r/w Article 215, Constitution of India) by Ex. MWO. Ashok Kumar (IAF), a member of Sainik Vihar Site/House Owners Welfare Association, against the State of Karnataka (Department of Revenue), the Tahsildar, Yelahanka Upa Nagara, and four private individuals, alleging willful disobedience of the Single Judge's order dated 23.06.2023 in W.P. No. 2074/2023. That order had dismissed the writ petition (petitioner-Society lacking locus standi) in reliance on the HCGP's undertaking that the Tahsildar's impugned order dated 10.01.2023 (Bengaluru North Taluk, Yelahanka Upa Nagara) would be implemented only against persons party to the proceedings, with any eviction occurring only after affording an opportunity of hearing. Meanwhile the Division Bench, on 26.09.2024, issued a mandamus in W.P. No. 17208 of 2024 to implement the order/notice dated 10.01.2023 while dismissing W.P. Nos. 13659, 18606, 19011 and 19012 of 2024 with liberty to establish rights before the competent civil court in terms of the Trial Court's findings in O.S. No. 665 of 2007 and connected suits; interim orders in W.A. Nos. 1505/2024 (09.10.2024) and 1611/2024 (30.10.2024) directed maintenance of status quo regarding possession of the writ petition schedule property. Held: in view of those interim orders the Single Judge's order dated 23.06.2023 cannot be implemented; no willful disobedience of the order or the undertaking was found; the contempt proceedings are dropped, with liberty reserved to the complainant to work out his remedies in accordance with law regarding possession; the Court expressly expressed no opinion on the merits of the parties' contentions, which remain open.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:40412-DB CCC No. 1341 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 1341 OF 2024

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

EX. MWO. ASHOK KUMAR-(IAF) S/O. LATE SADANAND, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 122, 9TH MAIN, SAINIK VIHAR LAYOUT, KENCHANAHALLI, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU -560064. MEMBER OF SAINIK VIHAR SITE/HOUSE OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION.

¶11

…COMPLAINANT

¶12

(BY SRI. ABDUL NAZEER MATTARA., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: High Court Of Karnataka

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIDHANA SOUDA

¶16

DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDI M S BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001 REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶17

SRI. SHREYAS G. S. THE TAHSILDAR YELAHANKA UPANAGARA NES OFFICE ROAD, SUGAPPA LAYOUT EAST COLONY, YELAHANKA NORTH TALUK BENGALURU - 560064.

¶18

RAMESH AGED NOT KNOWN

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:40412-DB CCC No. 1341 of 2024

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

S/O NOT KNOWN RESIDING AT A SECTOR YELAHANKA NEW TOWN YELAHANKA - 560064.

¶22

MR. AZMATHULLA KHAN S/O. IBRAHIM KHAN, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.17/A, H CROSS ROAD, BISMILLAH NAGARA, BENGALURU - 560029.

¶23

G. VENKATARAMANA S/O G.C.K. SOMAYAJI AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS 295, PADMAKALA 1ST MAIN, VIDYAPEETA ROAD BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU-560 085.

¶24

UMAVENKAT W/O G. VENKATARAMANA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 295, 1ST MAIN, VIDYAPEETA ROAD BSK, 3RD STAGE BENGALURU - 560 085.

¶25

…ACCUSED

¶26

(BY SMT. SHWETHA KRISHNAPPA, AGA FOR A1 & A2; SRI. RAGHAV PARTHASARATHY., ADVOCATE FOR A3)

¶27

THIS CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYS THAT TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.2 TO 6 FOR NOT COMPLYING WITH THE ORDER/DIRECTION DATED 23.06.2023 IN WP NO.2074/2023 WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-E PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED 2 TO 6 FOR THEIR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE AND ETC.,

¶28

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and

¶30

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶31

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:40412-DB CCC No. 1341 of 2024

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

ORAL ORDER

¶35

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)

¶36

This contempt petition is filed alleging willful disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge dated 23.06.2023 passed in W.P.No.2074/2023.

¶37

The relevant portion of the order of the learned

¶38

Single Judge is extracted herein below:

¶39

"3. Further, the learned HCGP for respondent No.1 upon instructions submits that the impugned order will be implemented only against the persons who are party to the proceedings and not against those who are not a party to the proceedings before respondent No.1. If anybody has to be evicted pursuant to the impugned order, the same will be done only after affording them an opportunity of hearing.

¶40

4. On the ground that the petitioner-Society has no locus-standi, and in the light of the undertaking given by the learned HCGP, the writ petition is hereby dismissed. In view of dismissal of the main petition, pending IAs. stand disposed of."

¶41

The aforesaid order indicates that the learned

¶42

HCGP appearing for respondent No.1, upon instructions, submitted that the impugned order will be implemented only against the persons, who are party to the proceedings

¶43

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:40412-DB CCC No. 1341 of 2024

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

and not against those who are not a party to the proceedings before the respondent No.1. The impugned order in the aforesaid writ petition was dated 10.01.2023 passed by the respondent No.1 - Tahasildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, Yelahanka Upa Nagara, Bengaluru.

¶46

It is noticed that one Smt.Radhika K.B. and others have filed W.P.No.13659/2024. The learned Single

¶47

Judge of this Court has disposed of the W.P.No.13659/2024 along with other matters vide order dated 26.09.2024. The operative portion of the said order reads as under:

¶48

"i) W.P.No.17208 of 2024 is hereby allowed and Writ of mandamus is issued to respondent No.4 - Thasildar, Yalahanka, Bengaluru, to implement the order/notice dated 10.01.2023;

¶49

ii) W.P.No.13659 of 2024, W.P.No.18606 of 2024, W.P.No.19011 of 2024 and W.P.No.19012 of 2024 are hereby dismissed and liberty is reserved to the petitioners herein to establish their right in respect of the subject land/sites before the competent civil court, in terms of the finding recorded by the Trial Court in OS No.665 of 2007 and connected suits, if so advised.

¶50

No order as to costs."

¶51

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:40412-DB CCC No. 1341 of 2024

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

The order of the learned Single Judge dated 26.09.2024 is challenged in W.A.No.1611/2024 and W.A.No.1505/2024.

¶54

The coordinate bench in W.A.No.1611/2024 on 30.10.2024 has passed the following order:

¶55

"Learned AGA accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶56

Sri Saravana.S, learned counsel having entered caveat for respondent No.4, learned counsel for the appellant is permitted to serve a copy of the writ appeal to learned counsel for respondent No.4.

¶57

In this writ appeal, the appellant has challenged the order passed in W.P.No.13659/2024 dated 26.09.2024.

¶58

Learned counsel for the appellant has produced the copy of the interim order passed in W.A.No.1505/2024 arising out of W.P.No.18606/2024.

¶59

On perusal, the order passed in W.P.Nos.13659/2024 and 18606/2024 are common order in the connected writ petitions in respect of same cause of action.

¶60

In that view of the matter, the parties are directed to maintain status-quo in respect of possession of the writ petition schedule property, till the next date of hearing.

¶61

Re-notify on 13.11.2024."

¶62

¶63

NC: 2025:KHC:40412-DB CCC No. 1341 of 2024

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

The coordinate bench in W.A.No.1505/2024 on

¶66

09.10.2024 has passed the following order:

¶67

"Learned AGA accepts notice for respondents No. 1 and 2.

¶68

Sri. Saravana, learned counsel having entered caveat appears for respondent No.4.

¶69

Learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission to take out hand summons to respondent No.3.

¶70

Learned counsel is permitted to take out hand summons to respondent No.3.

¶71

List on 16.10.2024, till then, parties are directed to maintain status quo with regard to the writ petition schedule property in respect of possession."

¶72

It is the contention of the learned counsel for

¶73

the complainant that the undertaking of the learned HCGP

¶74

that the impugned order will be implemented only against the party to the proceedings before the Tahasildar is violated by some goonda elements with the help of police.

¶75

Consideration of such contention would not arise in view of

¶76

the interim order in the writ appeal.

¶77

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:40412-DB CCC No. 1341 of 2024

¶78

HC-KAR

¶79

The contentions of the learned counsel for the

¶80

complainant that despite the orders by the Division Bench, the goonda elements, in colluding with the revenue and police authorities, are trying to dispossess the complainant, cannot be gone into in the present

¶81

proceedings.

¶82

It is open for the complainant to work out his remedies in accordance with law with regard to the possession.

¶83

In view of the aforesaid orders, the order of the learned Single Judge dated 23.06.2023 passed in W.P.No.2074/2023 cannot be implemented and we do not

¶84

find any willful disobedience of the order or an undertaking as alleged. In view of the aforesaid event, the contempt proceedings are dropped reserving liberty to the complainant to work out his remedies in accordance with law.

¶85

¶86

NC: 2025:KHC:40412-DB CCC No. 1341 of 2024

¶87

HC-KAR

¶88

It is made clear that this Court has not

¶89

expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the contentions urged by the learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate and the same are kept open.

¶90

Sd/(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE

¶91

Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

¶92

BSR

¶93

List No.: 3 Sl No.: 5

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order/direction dated 23.06.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 2074/2023, compliance with which was sought in this contempt petition and which was alleged to have been willfully disobeyed by Accused Nos. 2 to 6.¶36
High Court of Karnataka (learned Single Judge) · 23.06.2023
Prior proceeding
Institution of this Civil Contempt Petition under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 r/w Article 215 of the Constitution of India, praying for initiation of contempt proceedings against Accused Nos. 2 to 6 for non-compliance with the order/direction dated 23.06.2023 in W.P. No. 2074/2023.¶27
Prior proceeding
The impugned order underlying W.P. No. 2074/2023 was dated 10.01.2023, passed by Respondent No.1 - Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, Yelahanka Upa Nagara, Bengaluru.¶45
Prior proceeding
Undertaking recorded in the order of 23.06.2023 in W.P. No. 2074/2023: the learned HCGP submitted upon instructions that the impugned order would be implemented only against persons party to the proceedings before Respondent No.1, and that anybody to be evicted pursuant thereto would be dealt with only after affording an opportunity of hearing.¶39
Prior proceeding
By order dated 23.06.2023 the learned Single Judge dismissed W.P. No. 2074/2023 on the ground that the petitioner-Society had no locus standi, in light of the undertaking given by the learned HCGP.¶40
Prior proceeding
W.P. No. 13659/2024 filed by Smt. Radhika K.B. and others was disposed of with connected matters vide order dated 26.09.2024; W.P. No. 17208 of 2024 was allowed with a Writ of mandamus to Respondent No.4 - Thasildar, Yalahanka, Bengaluru, to implement the order/notice dated 10.01.2023.¶48
Prior proceeding
In the same 26.09.2024 disposal, W.P. Nos. 13659, 18606, 19011 and 19012 of 2024 were dismissed with liberty reserved to those petitioners to establish their rights over the subject land/sites before the competent civil court, in terms of the Trial Court's finding in O.S. No. 665 of 2007 and connected suits.¶49
Prior proceeding
Interim order of the coordinate bench in W.A. No. 1505/2024 (challenging the order dated 26.09.2024), dated 09.10.2024: parties directed to maintain status quo with regard to the writ petition schedule property in respect of possession until 16.10.2024.¶71
Prior proceeding
Interim order of the coordinate bench in W.A. No. 1611/2024 (also challenging the order dated 26.09.2024), dated 30.10.2024: parties directed to maintain status-quo in respect of possession of the writ petition schedule property till the next date of hearing; re-notified on 13.11.2024.¶60

Ex Mwo Ashok Kumar Iaf v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ex Mwo Ashok Kumar Iaf v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahesh Singh Vs the State of Karnataka

The Bangalore Development Authority Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Naremma Vs Station House Officer

Sri a S Satish Kumar Vs the State of Karnatka

Smt Nazhath Jabeen Vs Sri Jagadeesh G IAS

Mrs Shameem Sulthana Vs the State of Karnataka