Mrs Shameem Sulthana v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Oct 2025CCC/1345/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CCC No.1345/2024, High Court of Karnataka (DB: Anu Sivaraman & Vijaykumar A. Patil JJ.), order dated 13.10.2025 — contempt proceedings alleging willful disobedience of the learned Single Judge's order dated 23.06.2023 in W.P.No.2074/2023 (recording HCGP undertaking re implementation of Tahasildar's order dated 10.01.2023 only against parties) dropped; no willful disobedience found in view of interim status quo orders in W.A.Nos.1611/2024 and 1505/2024; allegations of dispossession by goonda elements with revenue/police collusion held not examinable in contempt; liberty reserved to complainant to pursue lawful remedies; merits of contentions kept open.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings dropped; liberty reserved to the complainant to work out her remedies in accordance with law. ¶¶84

Mrs Shameem Sulthana Vs the State of Karnataka — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt proceedings dropped; liberty reserved to the complainant to work out her remedies in accordance with law.

¶¶84

Issue for consideration

Whether Accused Nos. 2 to 6 willfully disobeyed the order/direction dated 23.06.2023 in W.P.No.2074/2023 (and the undertaking of the learned HCGP recorded therein), warranting initiation of contempt proceedings and punishment. +1 more

¶¶27

Court's answer

In view of the aforesaid orders (interim status quo directions in the writ appeals), the order of the learned Single Judge dated 23.06.2023 passed in W.P.No.2074/2023 cannot be implemented, and the Court finds no willful disobedience of the order or of the undertaking as alleged.

¶¶84

Ratio / Principle

The complainant's contentions that goonda elements, in collusion with revenue and police authorities, are attempting to dispossess her cannot be gone into in the present contempt proceedings, consideration thereof not arising in view of the interim orders in the writ appeals.

¶¶82

Key takeaways

It is open to the complainant to work out her remedies in accordance with law with regard to possession.ratio¶¶83
The Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the contentions urged by the complainant's counsel and the learned Additional Government Advocate; the same are kept open.obiter¶¶89

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Sections 11 and 12 r/w Article 215, Constitution of India — Civil Contempt Petition No.1345/2024 alleging willful disobedience by Accused Nos. 2 to 6 of the learned Single Judge's order dated 23.06.2023 in W.P.No.2074/2023, whereby the writ petition was dismissed recording the learned HCGP's undertaking that the Tahasildar's order dated 10.01.2023 would be implemented only against persons party to the proceedings before respondent No.1 and any eviction effected only after affording an opportunity of hearing — subsequently, in connected writ petitions disposed on 26.09.2024, W.P.No.17208 of 2024 was allowed with a writ of mandamus to the Thasildar to implement the order/notice dated 10.01.2023, while W.P.Nos.13659, 18606, 19011 and 19012 of 2024 were dismissed with liberty to establish rights before the competent civil court in terms of the Trial Court's findings in OS No.665 of 2007 and connected suits — the order dated 26.09.2024 challenged in W.A.Nos.1611/2024 and 1505/2024, in which coordinate benches directed the parties to maintain status quo as to possession of the writ petition schedule property — in view of such interim orders, the order dated 23.06.2023 cannot be implemented; no willful disobedience of the order or the undertaking found; allegations of dispossession by goonda elements in collusion with revenue and police authorities cannot be gone into in the contempt proceedings; contempt proceedings dropped with liberty to the complainant to work out her remedies in accordance with law; merits of the contentions urged by both sides kept open.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:40409-DB CCC No.1345/2024

¶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.1345/2024

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: High Court Of Karnataka

¶11

MRS. SHAMEEM SULTHANA W/O MR. SYED KHAJA KAMAL PASHA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT NO.13, CHENNAPPA REDDY COMPLEX ANANTHAPURA VILLAGE ATTUR POST, BANGALORE-560064 MEMBER OF SAINIK VIHAR SITE/HOUSE OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION.

¶12

…COMPLAINANT

¶13

(BY SRI. ABDUL NAZEER MATTARA, ADV.,)

¶14

AND:

¶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 NEW OFFICE ROAD SUGAPPA LAYOUT, EAST COLONY YELAHANKA NORTH TALUK BENGALURU-560064.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:40409-DB CCC No.1345/2024

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

RAMESH R/AT A SECTOR YELAHANKA NEW TOWN YELAHANKA-560064.

¶22

MR. AZMATHULLA KHAN S/O IBRAHIM KHAN AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT NO.17/1, H CROSS ROAD BISMILLAH NAGARA BENGALURU-560029.

¶23

G. VENKATARAMANA S/O G.C.K. SOMAYAJI AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS 295, PADMAKALA, IST MAIN VIDYAPEETA ROAD BSK 3RD STAGE BENGALURU-560085.

¶24

UMAVENKAT W/O G. VENKATARAMANA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 295, IST MAIN VIDYAPEETA ROAD BSK 3RD STAGE BENGALURU-560085.

¶25

…ACCUSED

¶26

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

¶27

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING 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 HON'BLE COURT AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED 2 TO 6 FOR THEIR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE & ETC.

¶28

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

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:40409-DB CCC No.1345/2024

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶32

ORAL ORDER

¶33

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

¶34

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.

¶35

The relevant portion of the order of the learned

¶36

Single Judge is extracted herein below:

¶37

"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.

¶38

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."

¶39

The aforesaid order indicates that the learned

¶40

HCGP appearing for respondent No.1, upon instructions,

¶41

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:40409-DB CCC No.1345/2024

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

submitted 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 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.

¶44

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

¶45

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:

¶46

"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;

¶47

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

¶48

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:40409-DB CCC No.1345/2024

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

Court in OS No.665 of 2007 and connected suits, if so advised.

¶51

No order as to costs."

¶52

The order of the learned Single Judge dated

¶53

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

¶55

30.10.2024 has passed the following order:

¶56

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

¶57

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.

¶58

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

¶59

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.

¶60

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.

¶61

¶62

NC: 2025:KHC:40409-DB CCC No.1345/2024

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

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.

¶65

Re-notify on 13.11.2024."

¶66

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

¶67

09.10.2024 has passed the following order:

¶68

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

¶69

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

¶70

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

¶71

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

¶72

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."

¶73

It is the contention of the learned counsel for

¶74

the complainant that the undertaking of the learned HCGP

¶75

that the impugned order will be implemented only against

¶76

the party to the proceedings before the Tahasildar is violated by some goonda elements with the help of police.

¶77

¶78

NC: 2025:KHC:40409-DB CCC No.1345/2024

¶79

HC-KAR

¶80

Consideration of such contention would not arise in view of

¶81

the interim order in the writ appeal.

¶82

The contentions of the learned counsel for the 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 proceedings.

¶83

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

¶84

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 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

¶85

¶86

NC: 2025:KHC:40409-DB CCC No.1345/2024

¶87

HC-KAR

¶88

complainant to work out her remedies in accordance with law.

¶89

It is made clear that this Court has not 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 List No.: 3 Sl No.: 9

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order/direction dated 23.06.2023 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.2074/2023 (at Annexure-E), whereby the writ petition was dismissed recording the learned HCGP's undertaking, alleged to have been willfully disobeyed by Accused Nos. 2 to 6.¶¶34
High Court of Karnataka (learned Single Judge) · 23.06.2023
Prior proceeding
Impugned order in W.P.No.2074/2023 dated 10.01.2023 passed by respondent No.1 - Tahasildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, Yelahanka Upa Nagara, Bengaluru.¶¶43
Prior proceeding
In W.P.No.2074/2023, the learned HCGP for respondent No.1 submitted upon instructions that the impugned order would be implemented only against persons party to the proceedings before respondent No.1, and that any eviction would be effected only after affording an opportunity of hearing.¶¶37
Prior proceeding
On the ground that the petitioner-Society had no locus standi, and in light of the HCGP's undertaking, W.P.No.2074/2023 was dismissed by the learned Single Judge.¶¶38
Prior proceeding
One Smt. Radhika K.B. and others filed W.P.No.13659/2024.¶¶44
Prior proceeding
The learned Single Judge disposed of W.P.No.13659/2024 along with other connected matters vide order dated 26.09.2024.¶¶45
Prior proceeding
By the order dated 26.09.2024, W.P.No.17208 of 2024 was allowed and a writ of mandamus issued to respondent No.4 - Thasildar, Yalahanka, Bengaluru, to implement the order/notice dated 10.01.2023.¶¶46
Prior proceeding
By the same order dated 26.09.2024, W.P.Nos.13659, 18606, 19011 and 19012 of 2024 were dismissed with liberty reserved to the petitioners.¶¶47
Prior proceeding
Liberty reserved to the petitioners 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.¶¶50
Prior proceeding
The order of the learned Single Judge dated 26.09.2024 was challenged in W.A.No.1611/2024 and W.A.No.1505/2024.¶¶53
Prior proceeding
Coordinate bench in W.A.No.1505/2024 on 09.10.2024 permitted hand summons to respondent No.3 and directed parties to maintain status quo with regard to possession of the writ petition schedule property until 16.10.2024.¶¶72
Prior proceeding
Coordinate bench in W.A.No.1611/2024 on 30.10.2024 noted that the orders in W.P.Nos.13659/2024 and 18606/2024 were common orders in connected writ petitions on the same cause of action, and directed parties to maintain status-quo as to possession of the writ petition schedule property till the next date of hearing, re-notifying on 13.11.2024.¶¶64

Mrs Shameem Sulthana v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs Shameem Sulthana 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

Ex Mwo Ashok Kumar Iaf Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri a S Satish Kumar Vs the State of Karnatka

Smt Nazhath Jabeen Vs Sri Jagadeesh G IAS