Disposed¶56

Mr. Nithyanandan J v. Mr. Mahesh Rao

Karnataka HC2 Dec 2025CCC/188/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CCC No. 188 of 2025, High Court of Karnataka (DB), decided 02.12.2025 by Vibhu Bakhru, CJ and C.M. Poonacha, J. Contempt of Courts Act 1971 Sections 11 and 12; alleged wilful disobedience of order dated 13.12.2024 in W.P.No.25448/2023 permitting booth of 6 feet x 7.9 feet; obstruction by accused Nos. 5 to 8 (Rathnamma, Munraj K, Manjula, Charles); BBMP officials accused Nos. 1 to 4 (Mahesh Rao, Ramesh, Bhagya Lakshmi, Keton Vyas); unconditional apology accepted; complaint closed.

What did the court decide?

Unconditional apology of accused Nos. 5 to 8 accepted; contempt complaint closed. ¶56

Mr. Nithyanandan J Vs Mr. Mahesh Rao — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:50135-DB CCC No. 188 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 188 OF 2025

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

MR. NITHYANANDAN J AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS S/O JAYARAM #10/1, GANGMAN QUARTERS SOUTH ROAD, KBAR ROAD AUSTIN TOWN, VIVEK NAGAR BANGALORE KARNATAKA - 560 047

¶11

…COMPLAINANT

¶12

Digitally signed by PRABHAKAR (BY SRI MOHSIN KHAN PATHAN, ADVOCATE FOR SWETHAKRISHNAN SRI AZHAR ALI FAROOQI, ADVOCATE)

¶13

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

AND:

¶15

MR. MAHESH RAO

¶16

COMMISSIONER BBMP HEAD OFFICE CORPORATION CIRCLE HUDSON CIRCLE, HUDSON CHURCH

¶17

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:50135-DB CCC No. 188 of 2025

HC-KAR

TOWN HALL, BANGALORE

KARNATAKA - 560 002

MR. RAMESH ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BBMP, DOMLUR SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICE 1^ST MAIN ROAD, 1^ST 'B' CROSS DOMLUR EXTENSION BANGALORE - 560 071

¶22

MS.BHAGYA LAKSHMI

¶23

HEALTH OFFICER-EAST BBMP, MAYOHALL, ASHOK NAGAR BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 025

¶24

MR. KETON VYAS ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER 12^TH FLOOR, PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDING M.G. ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001 KARNATAKA

¶25

SMT. RATHNAMMA W/O LATE C. KUMAR AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDING AT GANGMAN QUARTERS

¶26

NC: 2025:KHC:50135-DB CCC No. 188 of 2025

¶27

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

#10, SOUTH ROAD, KBAR RD AUSTIN TOWN, VIVEK NAGAR BANGALORE - 560 047

¶30

SRI MUNRAJ. K

¶31

S/O LATE C. KUMAR

¶32

AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS RESIDING AT GANGMAN QUARTERS #10, SOUTH ROAD, KBAR RD AUSTIN TOWN, VIVEK NAGAR BANGALORE - 560 047

¶33

SMT. MANJULA D/O KUMAR AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RESIDING AT GANGMAN QUARTERS #10, SOUTH ROAD, KBAR RD AUSTIN TOWN, VIVEK NAGAR BANGALORE - 560 047

¶34

SRI CHARLES

¶35

HUSBAND OF MANJULA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS RESIDING AT GANGMAN QUARTERS #10, SOUTH ROAD, KBAR RD

¶36

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:50135-DB CCC No. 188 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

AUSTIN TOWN, VIVEK NAGAR BANGALORE - 560 047

¶40

…ACCUSED

¶41

(BY SRI KARTHIKEYAN B.S., ADVOCATE FOR ACCUSED No.1 TO 3, R-4 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED, SMT. TEJASWINI S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI AVINASH C., ADVOCATE FOR ACCUSED No.5 TO 8)

¶42

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST ACCUSED PERSONS FOR WILLFULLY AND DELIBERATELY DISOBEYING THE ORDER DATED 13.12.2024 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT BENGALURU, IN W.P.No.25448/2023 (ANNEXURE-A), OBSTRUCTING THE COMPLAINANT'S USE OF THE ALLOTTED SPACE AND MAKING UNLAWFUL DEMANDS & ETC.

¶43

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

¶44

¶45

NC: 2025:KHC:50135-DB CCC No. 188 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶48

ORAL ORDER

¶49

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶50

The complainant has filed the present complaint alleging wilful disobedience of the order dated 13.12.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.25448/2023 (LB-BMP), whereby the complainant was allowed to construct a Booth measuring 6 feet x 7.9 feet in terms of the sketch and to operate from such Booth as a transitory operation without causing any nuisance.

¶51

The complainant was prevented from raising the said construction and the area in question was obstructed by accused Nos.5 to 8. Photographs reflecting the same has been placed on record.

¶52