Sri C v Jayarame Gowda Vs the State of Karnataka — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

Sri C v Jayarame Gowda Vs the State of Karnataka — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the contempt petition was disposed of as it did not survive in view of the compliance shown (endorsement dated 19.07.2024), with liberty to pursue independent appropriate proceedings against the endorsement.

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused (the State of Karnataka and the Tahsildar, Mulbagal) committed wilful disobedience/violation of the court order dated 04.12.2023 passed in W.P.No.25499/2023 (KLR), so as to warrant contempt proceedings.

Court's answer

Since the compliance affidavit indicated that the representation dated 09.08.2023 was considered and an endorsement dated 19.07.2024 reflecting the decision was issued, the present contempt petition does not survive and is disposed of.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner is aggrieved on merits in respect of the endorsement dated 19.07.2024, he may institute independent appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum; this court does not express any opinion on merits.obiter¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Contempt Petition No. 492 of 2024 (High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru; coram Chief Justice N. V. Anjaria and Justice M.I. Arun; judgment per the Chief Justice; decided 06.03.2025) was filed under Articles 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act alleging wilful disobedience/violation of the order dated 04.12.2023 in W.P.No.25499/2023 (KLR), whereby the learned Single Judge had directed respondent No.3, the Tahsildar, Mulbagal, to consider the complainant's representation dated 09.08.2023 seeking change in revenue records in view of the demise of his father, within three months. The respondents' compliance affidavit showed that the representation was considered and an endorsement dated 19.07.2024 reflecting the decision was issued (page 6, Annexure R1). Holding that the petition therefore did not survive, the Division Bench disposed of it, observing that if the petitioner is aggrieved on merits by the endorsement he may institute independent appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum, on which the court expressed no opinion on merits.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:9785-DB CCC No. 492 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025

PRESENT

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

AND

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 492 OF 2024

BETWEEN:

SRI. C.V. JAYARAME GOWDA S/O LATE VENKATEGOWDA @ VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, R/AT CHALAPALLI VILLAGE, ALANGURU POST, KASABA HOBLI, MULBAGAL TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT 563 131.

…COMPLAINANT

(BY SRI. ADINARAYANAPPA, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by PRABHAKAR SWETHA KRISHNAN

Location: High Court of Karnataka

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001 REPT. BY ITS SECRETARY.

SRI. RAJASHEKAR THE TAHSILDAR, MULBAGAL TALUK,

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:9785-DB CCC No. 492 of 2024

MULBAGAL - 563 131, KOLAR DISTRICT.

…ACCUSED

(BY SRI. S.H. RAGHAVENDRA, AGA)

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, PRAYING TO ISSUE NECESSARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR WILFUL DISOBEDIENCE/VIOLATION OF THE COURT ORDER DATED 04.12.2023 PASSED IN W.P.NO.25499/2023 (KLR)

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

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE

N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

ORAL JUDGMENT

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

The only direction of learned Single Judge contained in order dated 04.12.2023 was to direct respondent No.3Tahsildar, Mulbagal, to consider the representation dated 09.08.2023 within three months. By the said representation, the petitioner had requested for change in the revenue records in view of the demise of his father.

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9785-DB CCC No. 492 of 2024

The compliance affidavit filed by the respondents indicated that the representation was considered and pursuant there to, endorsement dated 19.07.2024 reflecting the decision has been issued. The copy of the said endorsement figures on the record along with the compliance affidavit (page 6, Annexure R1).

In view of the above, the present contempt petition does not survive. It is accordingly disposed of.

If the petitioner is aggrieved on merits in respect of the endorsement issued as above, it is open for the petitioner to institute independent appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum in respect of which, this court does not express any opinion on merits.

Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

YN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36 CT:SNN