Disposed¶43

Far East Broadcasting Associates of India v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Feb 2025CCC/702/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC (DB, NC: 2025:KHC:7670-DB), CCC No. 702 of 2024, decided 19.02.2025. Civil contempt; Sections 11 and 12, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971; final orders dated 12.09.2023 in W.P.No.12625/2021 (LA-BDA); Bangalore Development Authority; Section 38D, Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976; endorsement dated 20.08.2024; compliance stated; endorsement set aside by Single Judge in writ petition; petition disposed as it does not survive; fresh cause of action reserved for further development; N. V. Anjaria, Chief Justice; M.I. Arun, J.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition disposed of as the directions under contempt were stated to be complied with; complainant left at liberty to institute appropriate legal proceedings on any further development in the subject matter, if so advised. ¶43

Far East Broadcasting Associates of India Vs the State… — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:7670-DB CCC No. 702 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

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

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶8

CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.702 OF 2024

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

FAR EAST BROADCASTING ASSOCIATES OF INDIA A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES

¶11

Digitally signed by H K HEMA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

REGISTRATION ACT HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.1 COMMISSARIAT ROAD BENGALURU - 560 025 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR

¶13

AND P.A. HOLDER DR. A. GREGORY ASHOK S/O LATE AROKIASWAMY PILLAI AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS.

¶14

…COMPLAINANT

¶15

(BY SRI H.L. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶18

... PROFORMA RESPONDENT

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7670-DB CCC No. 702 of 2024

¶20

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST

¶21

T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU - 560 020 REP. BY ITS THE COMMISSIONER JAYARAM N.

¶22

SRI JAYARAM N. THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶23

SRI MANJUNATH EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶24

SRI CHANDRA MOHAN ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶25

SMT. RUPA LAKSHMI ASST. ENGINEER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶26

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC:7670-DB CCC No. 702 of 2024

¶28

SMT. KRUPALINI THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD BENGALURU - 560 020.

¶29

…ACCUSED

¶30

(BY SRI S.H. RAGHAVENDRA, AGA FOR R.1; SRI MURUGESH V. CHARATI, ADVOCATE FOR R.2 TO R.7.)

¶31

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF

¶32

THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE AND OFFENCES COMMITTED BY THE RESPONDENTS OF THE FINAL ORDERS PASSED AS PER ANNEXURE-A UNDER W.P.NO.12625/2021 (LA-BDA) PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT VIDE FINAL ORDER DATED 12.09.2023, ETC.

¶33

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶34

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and

¶35

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶36

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:7670-DB CCC No. 702 of 2024

¶38

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶39

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

¶40

Learned advocate Mr.H.L.Pradeep Kumar for the complainant fairly stated that the directions brought under contempt jurisdiction are complied with, as the endorsement dated 20.08.2024 has been issued by the respondent-Bangalore Development Authority under Section 38D of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976.

¶41

In addition, it was stated that the said endorsement has been set aside in a writ petition which was allowed by learned Single Judge.

¶42

In view of the above statement, the contempt petition does not survive and it is disposed of.

¶43

Any further development in the subject matter shall give fresh cause of action to the complainant to institute appropriate legal proceedings, if so advised.

¶44

Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶45

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶46

hkh. List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51

Far East Broadcasting Associates of India v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Far East Broadcasting Associates of India 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

Sri. Chandrappa Neelappa Koppad Vs the Chief Secretary

S.B. Boregowda, Vs State of Karnataka

Karnataka Janata Vedike Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Santosh Vs P. Manivannan IAS

Sri K N Hanumanthaiah Vs Apoorva Bidari

N. Rajanna Vs the State of Karnataka