Dismissed¶35

Smt. Renuka N v. Smt Yeshoda

Karnataka HC24 Feb 2026CCC/104/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC Bengaluru, CCC No. 104 of 2025, decided 24-02-2026; bench: Vibhu Bakhu CJ & C.M. Poonacha J (per Chief Justice). Civil contempt - alleged disobedience of undertaking recorded in CCC No.682/2021 order dated 03.01.2023 regarding construction/repairs on schedule 'D' property; backdrop of interim order 21.01.2021, rejection of IA No.V in OS No.54/2013 (05.03.2021) and disposal of MFA No.260/2021; filed under Sections 11 & 12, Contempt of Courts Act; contempt proceedings not initiated; complaint closed; liberty to seek early disposal of suit in Civil Court; no damages or amounts awarded; no precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

No punishment ordered and no contempt proceedings initiated; complaint closed, with liberty to both parties to approach the Civil Court for early disposal of their suit; pending applications disposed of.

Smt. Renuka N Vs Smt Yeshoda — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:11598-DB CCC No. 104 of 2025

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 104 OF 2025

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT. RENUKA N WIFE OF T.K. VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.356 AVALAHALLI VILLAGE VIRGONAGAR POST BENGALURU EAST TALUK BENGALURU 560 049.

¶11

…COMPLAINANT

¶12

Digitally (BY SRI. JANARDHANA G, ADVOCATE) signed by NIRMALA AND: DEVI Location: HIGH COURT SMT YESHODA OF W/O. V. VASUDEV, KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT AVALAHALLI VILLAGE, VIRGONAGAR POST, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE-560049

¶13

(BY SRI. JANARDHANA G, ADVOCATE)

¶14

…ACCUSED

¶15

(BY SRI. N S BHAT, ADVOCATE)

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:11598-DB CCC No. 104 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, BY THE COMPLAINANT, PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE OFFENCE COMMITTED BY THE ACCUSED FOR DISOBEYING THE UNDERTAKING GIVEN TO THIS HONBLE COURT IN CCC NO.682/2021 DATED 03.01.2023 UNDER ANNEXURE-C AND CONSEQUENTLY PUNISH HER FOR THE SAID ACT.

¶19

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶23

The complainant has filed the present complaint alleging

¶24

willful disobedience of an order dated 03.01.2023 passed by this Court in CCC No.682/2021.

¶25

The controversy relates to the accused carrying on construction work over the subject property. The complainant filed an application inter alia seeking a direction to restrain the accused from carrying on any construction in the suit property. Apparently, an interim order dated 21.01.2021 was passed. Thereafter, the complainant filed an application, IA No.V in OS No.54/2013, seeking a direction to the concerned police station for

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:11598-DB CCC No. 104 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

implementation of the said application. The said application was rejected by an order dated 05.03.2021.

¶29

The complainant filed an appeal against the said order [MFA No.260/2021]. The said appeal was disposed of by an order dated 21.01.2021. The said order indicates that the accused had made a statement that apart from completing the work already undertaken, she would not put up any further construction on Schedule 'D' properties. The Court had also noted the statement of accused that she had completed the construction and also the repair work and painting.

¶30

Thereafter, the complainant filed a contempt petition, CCC No.682/2021, which was disposed of by order dated 03.01.2023 recording the statement of the accused, that she would neither put up further construction nor effect any repair works in the schedule 'D' property. The contempt petition was closed by recording the undertaking of the accused that she would not put up any further construction nor effect any repair works in the subject property. It appears that not withstanding the undertaking the accused has carried on certain renovation and repair works.

¶31

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:11598-DB CCC No. 104 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

Learned counsel for the accused submits that the said works

¶34

are only for the purpose of maintenance of the building and no new construction has been raised.

¶35

Considering the controversy involved in the present case, we do not consider it apposite to initiate proceedings for Contempt of Court Act, 1971. It would be open for the parties to approach the Civil Court for early disposal of their suit. Complaint is accordingly, is closed.

¶36

All pending applications are also disposed of.

¶37

Sd/(VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶38

Sd/(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

¶39

Vmb List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21

Smt. Renuka N v. Smt Yeshoda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Renuka N v. Smt Yeshoda

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 H Ramaiah Vs Sri Krishna Murthy

Sri. Dashrath Hanmanth Suryavanshi Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri K N Ramachandra Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri a Nataraj Vs Sri T N Chandrashekar

Smt Muninarasamma Vs M/S Ksm Niketan Pvt. Ltd.

Sri N Nagireddy Vs the State of Karnataka