Sri B Subramani Vs Mr Kumar Nayak — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

Sri B Subramani Vs Mr Kumar Nayak — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No punishment imposed; contempt proceedings closed as there was no willful disobedience, and the notice issued to the accused stands discharged; the Authority is observed to take steps based on the documents, and the complainant may work out remedies in accordance with law if the Authority fails to act.

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused (Commissioner, BDA) committed willful disobedience of the order dated 06.09.2022 in W.P. No.14226/2021 directing consideration of the complainant's representation, warranting cognizance of civil contempt and punishment.

Court's answer

There was no willful disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge; accordingly, the contempt proceedings are closed and the notice issued to the accused stands discharged.

Key takeaways

Observation that the Authority shall take steps based on the documents furnished, and that it remains open to the complainant to work out remedies in accordance with law if the Authority fails to act.obiter¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil contempt petition (CCC No. 89 of 2023) under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act r/w Article 215 of the Constitution of India, filed by Sri B. Subramani against the Commissioner, Bengaluru Development Authority (BDA), alleging willful disobedience and non-implementation of the learned Single Judge's order dated 06.09.2022 in W.P. No.14226/2021 (BDA), which had directed the BDA to consider the complainant's representation within eight weeks. The BDA's affidavit dated 01.03.2023 showed correspondence seeking documents; the complainant furnished all required documents on 07.03.2023 together with a Government Order dated 18.04.2023, and an endorsement had been issued on 21.02.2023. The Division Bench (Anu Sivaraman and Vijaykumar A. Patil, JJ.; judgment per Vijaykumar A. Patil, J.) found no willful disobedience, closed the contempt proceedings, discharged the notice to the accused, observed that the Authority shall take steps based on the documents, and left the complainant free to work out remedies in accordance with law.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:46362-DB CCC No. 89 of 2023

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.89 OF 2023

BETWEEN:

SRI B. SUBRAMANI

S/O SRI BAKTHARACHALAM,

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO.132, HAL II 'A' STAGE,

BENGALURU-560008.

…COMPLAINANT

Digitally signed by CHANNEGOWDA PREMA Location: High Court of Karnataka

(BY SRI. SOMASHEKARA K. M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

MR. KUMAR NAYAK

THE COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (BDA)

KUMAR PARK WEST,

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:46362-DB CCC No. 89 of 2023

HC-KAR

T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD,

BENGALURU-560020.

…ACCUSED

(BY SRI. MURUGESH V CHARATI, ADVOCATE)

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE

CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF CIVIL CONTEMPT AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR DISOBEDIENCE AND NOT IMPLEMENTING THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP NO.14226/2021 (BDA) DATED 6.9.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:46362-DB CCC No. 89 of 2023

HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)

This contempt petition is filed alleging willful disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge dated 06.09.2022 passed in W.P. No.14226/2021, wherein the learned Single Judge had directed the respondent- BDA to consider the representation of the petitioner within eight weeks.

The affidavit of the BDA dated 01.03.2023 indicates that they have sent number of correspondence to the petitioner and requested him to furnish certain documents to act on them.

Sri Somashekar, learned counsel appearing for the complainant submits that on 07.03.2023, the complainant has furnished all the required documents and also the Government Order dated 18.04.2023 and submits that the respondent is required to act on such documents.

Learned counsel for the respondent on instruction submits that, if the complainant has furnished the required documents, they look into the documents and take necessary

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:46362-DB CCC No. 89 of 2023

HC-KAR

steps. He further submits that on 21.02.2023, an endorsement came to be issued. Accordingly, he seeks to close the proceedings.

In view of the aforesaid submissions, the contempt proceedings are closed as there is no willful disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge. Notice issue to the accused shall stand discharged.

It is needless to observe that the Authority shall take steps based on the documents. It is always open for the complainant to workout the remedies in accordance with law, if the Authority failed to act.

Sd/(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE

Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

List No.: 3 Sl No.: 15

PN