Sri K R Narasimhamurthy Vs Sri Naveen Joseph — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

Sri K R Narasimhamurthy Vs Sri Naveen Joseph — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt proceedings closed on a finding of substantial compliance; the petition is disposed of, with the complainants left free to pursue any grievance on the calculation of compensation before the competent authority or through independent proceedings, without expression of opinion on merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused (Special Land Acquisition Officer and Chief Executive Officer, KRDCL) wilfully disobeyed the order dated 03.04.2024 passed in Writ Petition No.5869/2024 (LA-RES) so as to be punishable under the contempt jurisdiction. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Since the compensation has been paid, there is substantial compliance with the Single Judge's direction; applying the doctrine of substantial compliance, the contempt proceedings are not required to be continued any further.

Key takeaways

Any persisting grievance of the complainants regarding the calculation of the amount or otherwise may be pursued by approaching the competent authority with a representation or by instituting independent proceedings in accordance with law; the court does not express any opinion on merits.obiter¶¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil contempt petition (CCC No. 778 of 2024) under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act alleging wilful disobedience by the Special Land Acquisition Officer and the Chief Executive Officer, KRDCL, of the Single Judge's order dated 03.04.2024 in Writ Petition No.5869/2024 (LA-RES), which had directed them to consider the complainants' compensation claim and pass appropriate orders within two months. A compliance affidavit and a cheque for Rs.33,07,369/- (the amount determined for all beneficiaries including the complainants) were placed on record, showing payment as per the award; the complainants disputed only the calculation of the amount. Holding that payment of the compensation constituted substantial compliance, and applying the doctrine of substantial compliance, the Division Bench (oral judgment per Chief Justice N. V. Anjaria, with Justice M.I.Arun) declined to continue the contempt proceedings and disposed of the petition, leaving the complainants free to agitate any calculation grievance before the competent authority by representation or through independent proceedings, without expressing any opinion on merits.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:6634-DB CCC No. 778 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

PRESENT

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

AND

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 778 OF 2024

BETWEEN:

SRI K.R. NARASIMHAMURTHY S/O LATE SRI K.P. RAMASWAMY AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/AT KANTANAKUNTE MALLATHHALLI POST DODDABALLAPUR TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-561 203.

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

SRI K.R. MUNIKRISHNAIAH S/O LATE SRI K.P. RAMASWAMY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT KANTANAKUNTE MALLATHHALLI POST DODDABALLAPUR TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-561 203.

SRI K.R. CHIKKAPAPAIAH S/O LATE SRI K.P. RAMASWAMY AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT KANTANAKUNTE MALLATHHALLI POST DODDABALLAPUR TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-561 203.

SRI K.R. JAYACHANDRA S/O LATE SRI K.P. RAMASWAMY AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT KANTANAKUNTE

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:6634-DB CCC No. 778 of 2024

MALLATHHALLI POST DODDABALLAPUR TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-561 203.

…COMPLAINANTS

(BY SRI N.V. SRIKANTH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI NAVEEN JOSEPH SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KRDCL, SAMPARKA SOUDHA 3^RD FLOOR, OPPOSITE TO ORIAN MALL RAJAJINAGARA, BENGALURU-560 010.

SRI AJITH KUMAR S.M. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER KRDCL, SAMPARKA SOUDHA 3^RD FLOOR, OPPOSITE TO ORION MALL RAJAJINAGARA BENGALURU-560 010.

…ACCUSED

(BY SRI AKASH R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI VIJAY KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR ACCUSED NO.1; ACCUSED NO.2 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION NO.5869/2024 (LA-RES) DATED 03.04.2024 AS PER ANNEXURE - A, ETC.

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

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6634-DB CCC No. 778 of 2024

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)

It is the following direction of learned Single Judge dated 03.04.2024 while disposing of the writ petition that is brought under the contempt jurisdiction for its alleged non-compliance,

"2. In my view, since the petitioners are claiming that they are entitled to receive the compensation in respect of the lands that have been acquired, it would be appropriate to direct 2^nd and 3^rd respondent to consider the request of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of."

Respondent Nos.2 and 3 who are the Special Land

Acquisition Officer and the Chief Executive Officer of the Karnataka Road Development Corporation Limited (KRDCL) were directed to

pass appropriate orders in respect of claim of compensation of the petitioners.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:6634-DB CCC No. 778 of 2024

Figures on record the compliance affidavit as well as the copy of cheque for Rs.33,07,369/- which is the amount determined for all the beneficiaries including the complainants. In paragraph 4 of the compliance affidavit it is stated that as per the award passed, the amount is paid to the claimants.

3.1 This factum is not disputed by learned advocate for the complainants. His only submission is that the amount paid is not as per the award. In other words, the complainants dispute the calculation of the amount.

As the compensation is paid, there is substantial compliance. Applying the doctrine of substantial compliance, the contempt proceedings are not required to be continued any further. If any grievance persists with the complainants about the calculation of the amount or otherwise, it will be open for the complainants to either approach the competent authority with a representation or take a recourse in accordance with law by instituting independent proceedings in respect of which, this court does not express any opinion on merits.

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:6634-DB CCC No. 778 of 2024

5. The petition is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12