Disposed¶31

Sri. B K Sudarshan v. Sri. Dr Devaraju B

Karnataka HC11 Feb 2025CCC/765/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court Division Bench (NC: 2025:KHC:6053-DB), CCC No. 765 of 2024, decided 11.02.2025; civil contempt; willful disobedience; Sections 11 and 12 Contempt of Courts Act 1971; Article 215 Constitution of India; Bangalore Development Authority (BDA); Deputy Secretary Dr. Devaraju B.; Commissioner D.C. Jayaram; compliance by endorsement dated 01.10.2024; underlying order dated 21.11.2023 in W.P.No.21548/2023 (BDA); contempt petition disposed; liberty reserved to challenge endorsement on merits; certified copy directed.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to challenge the endorsement dated 01.10.2024 on merits; certified copy of the order to be provided to the petitioner. ¶31

Sri. B K Sudarshan Vs Sri. Dr Devaraju B — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to challenge the endorsement dated 01.10.2024 on merits; certified copy of the order to be provided to the petitioner.

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether accused Nos. 1 and 2 (respondents) committed willful disobedience of the order dated 21.11.2023 passed in W.P.No.21548/2023 (BDA), warranting initiation of contempt proceedings and punishment under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India.

¶20

Court's answer

Issuance of the endorsement dated 01.10.2024 marks compliance of the directions of the learned Single Judge; learned advocate for the complainant-petitioner was not in a position to dispute this.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to challenge the said endorsement on merits.

¶29

Key takeaways

The court does not express anything on the merits of the endorsement; the petitioner may take appropriate recourse to challenge the same, if so advised, in accordance with law.obiter¶30
In view of the compliance effected through the endorsement, the contempt petition is disposed of.ratio¶31
Respondent No.2 stated that the order has already been officially communicated to the petitioner; the court directed that a certified copy shall also be provided.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Contempt Petition No. 765 of 2024 under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India, filed by B.K. Sudarshan against BDA officials (Dr. Devaraju B., Deputy Secretary, and D.C. Jayaram, Commissioner) alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 21.11.2023 passed in W.P.No.21548/2023 (BDA). After memo dated 16.12.2024 tendering endorsement/order dated 01.10.2024, and the complainant's advocate being unable to dispute that the endorsement marked compliance of the learned Single Judge's directions, the Division Bench (Chief Justice N. V. Anjaria and Justice M. I. Arun) disposed of the contempt petition on 11.02.2025, reserving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the endorsement on merits, expressing nothing on its merits, and directing that a certified copy of the order be provided.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:6053-DB CCC No. 765 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11^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 CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 765 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. B.K. SUDARSHAN S/O B.S. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT D.NO.311, 3^RD MAIN ROAD 3^RD PHASE, J.P NAGAR BANGALORE-560 078.

¶10

…COMPLAINANT

¶11

(BY SRI. J.C.KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

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

¶14

SRI. Dr. DEVARAJU B. WORKING AS DEPUTY SECRETARY TO BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BDA OFFICE, RAILWAY PARALLEL ROAD KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE-560 020.

¶15

SRI. D.C.JAYARAM COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BDA OFFICE, RAILWAY PARALLEL ROAD KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE-560 020.

¶16

…ACCUSED

¶17

(RESPONDENT No.1 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED; BY MR. CHINMAY KURANDWAD, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B.VACHAN, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTACCUSED No.2)

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:6053-DB CCC No. 765 of 2024

¶20

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 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 ACCUSED NO.1 TO 2 FOR HAVING COMMITTED WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED 21.11.2023 PASSED IN W.P.NO.21548/2023 (BDA) AS PER ANNEXURE - A AND PUNISH THEM AND ALSO TO TAKE SUITABLE ACTION AGAINST THEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶24

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

¶25

Memo dated 16.12.2024 was tendered on record by learned advocate Mr. B. Vachan for respondent No.2, accompanied by endorsement/order dated 01.10.2024.

¶26

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC:6053-DB CCC No. 765 of 2024

¶28

Learned advocate for the complainant-petitioner was not in a position to dispute that the issuance of endorsement marks compliance of the directions of learned Single Judge.

¶29

However, learned advocate for the petitioner requests that the liberty may be given to the petitioner to challenge the said endorsement on merits. Such liberty is reserved.

¶30

The petitioner may take appropriate recourse to challenge the same, if so advised in accordance with law, in respect of which, however this court does not express anything on merits.

¶31

The contempt petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶32

It was stated on behalf of respondent No.2 that the order is already communicated officially to the petitioner. Certified copy shall also be provided.

¶33

Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶34

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶35

PGG

Sri. B K Sudarshan v. Sri. Dr Devaraju B

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. B K Sudarshan v. Sri. Dr Devaraju B

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

The Svc Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Vs v Gopal

Karnataka Aromas Vs Karnataka Soaps and Detergents Limited

Sri. Shailesh Kumar Vs the Union of India

Sri Maruthi Associates Vs the State of Karnataka

Apsara Silks Vs Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board

Sri. Ramesh K N Vs Sri Babu Das Vgp