Sri G Rangappa Vs Sri. Nagaraj — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

Sri G Rangappa Vs Sri. Nagaraj — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt petition disposed of upon noting that the endorsement already issued marks compliance with the Court's directions; liberty reserved to the complainants to challenge the endorsement on merits, if so advised, with no opinion expressed on the merits of such challenge.

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused (the Tahsildar) disobeyed the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.7946/2020 dated 26.06.2023 (Annexure-A) so as to warrant initiation of contempt proceedings and punishment under Sections 10 and 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act.

Court's answer

An endorsement has already been issued, as fairly stated by learned advocate for the complainants, and it marks compliance with the Court's directions which were the subject matter of the present contempt petition.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the compliance so marked, the contempt proceedings do not survive and are accordingly disposed of.

Key takeaways

Liberty is reserved for the complainants to challenge the endorsement on merits, if so advised.ratio¶63
The Court expresses no opinion on the merits of any such challenge by the complainants to the endorsement, leaving that point expressly open.obiter¶63

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CCC No. 531 of 2024 (Civil), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (Division Bench: N. V. Anjaria, Chief Justice, and M.I. Arun, J.; oral judgment per the Chief Justice), decided 10.01.2025. Contempt petition under Sections 10 and 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act filed by 24 residents of Hachina Siddapura Village, Holehonnuru Hobli, Bhadravathi Taluk, Shivamogga District, against the Tahsildar, alleging disobedience of the orders passed in W.P.No.7946/2020 dated 26.06.2023 (Annexure-A). On the Court being fairly informed that the endorsement had already been issued and thereby marked compliance with the Court's directions, it was held that the contempt proceedings did not survive; the petition was accordingly disposed of, with liberty reserved to the complainants to challenge the endorsement on merits if so advised, the Court expressly declining to express any opinion on the merits of such challenge.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:925-DB CCC No. 531 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 PRESENT

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

AND

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

CCC NO. 531 OF 2024 (CIVIL)

BETWEEN:

SRI G RANGAPPA S/O.GANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS

SRI. KRISHNA NAIK S/O.LINGA NALK

AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS

K SAVITHRAMMA W/O.LATE.VEERESHCHAR AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

Digitally signed by PRABHAKAR SWETHA KRISHNAN

Location: High Court of Karnataka

RESIDENT OF NO.20 POST OFFICE ROAD AGARADAHALLI SHIVAMOGGA - 577 227

SRI H N KUMAR S/O NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS

SMT. MANJULA W/O AJJAIAH AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

SRI NAGARAJAPPA S/O GANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:925-DB CCC No. 531 of 2024

SRI AJJAIAH S/O GANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS

SRI RANGAPPA S/O KENCHAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

SRI HANUMANTHAPPA S/O THIMMABHOVI AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS

SRI KARIYAPPA S/O GANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS

SRI VEERESH S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS

SRI CHANDRAPPA S/O HALAPPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS

SMT. DAKSHAYANAMMA W/O VEERABHADRACHAR AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS

SRI PRAVEEN KUAMR S/O VEERESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS

SMT. GIRIJA BAI W/O YUVARAJ AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

SMT. NETHRAVATHI W/O RAMESH NAIK AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

K YUVARAJ S/O KRISHNA NAIK AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:925-DB CCC No. 531 of 2024

SMT. GOWRAMMA W/O SANNARUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

SRI MARAPPA S/O GANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS

SMT. SAKAMMA W/O DEVENDARAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS

SRI RAMESH S/O RAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS

SRI CHANDRA SINGH S/O RANGANATH SINGH AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS

SMT. YELLAMMA W/O ERAPPA D/O GUTHYA BHOVI AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS

SRI LAKSHMANA S/O GUTHYAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF HACHINA SIDDAPURA VILLAGE HOLEHONNURU HOBLI BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 301

…COMPLAINANTS

(BY SRI. BALARAJ A C, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI. NAGARAJ MAJOR THE TAHSILDAR BHARAVATHI TALUK BHADRAVATHI - 577 301

…ACCUSED

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:925-DB CCC No. 531 of 2024

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001

…PRO FORMA RESPONDENT (BY SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA)

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 10 AND 11 OF CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO INITIATE NECESSARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR DISOBEYING THE ORDERS PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.7946/2020 DATED 26.06.2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ALLOW THE ABOVE CONTEMPT PETITION BY GRANTING SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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

ORAL JUDGMENT

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

Endorsement is already issued, as stated fairly by learned

advocate for the complainants which marks the compliance of directions of the Court which are subject matter of the present contempt petition.

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:925-DB CCC No. 531 of 2024

2. In that view, the contempt proceedings does not survive. It is

accordingly disposed of.

Liberty is reserved for the complainants to challenge the endorsement on merits, if so advised. However, this Court does not express any opinion on merits of such challenge.

Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

CR

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 3