Disposed

Sri M Nagappa v. Sri Dr M v Venkatesh

Karnataka HC22 Jul 2026CCC/1503/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hereditary archakas alleged contempt of an interim order protecting their customary right to collect 'Tatte Kaasu'. Accused No.3 affirmed the tender notification did not affect that right, and counsel stated no obstruction occurred. Taking the statement on record, the court closed the complaint, permitting revival if material of disobedience emerges.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sri M Nagappa Vs Sri Dr M v Venkatesh — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

NC: 2026:KHC:37656-DB CCC No. 1503 of 2025

¶4

CNR: KAHC010753672025

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶6

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶9

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 1503 OF 2025

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SRI M. NAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS S/O LATE MANEGARA MADATHAMBADI

¶12

SRI K. NAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS S/O LATE KARUGANNA MADATHAMBADI

¶13

Digitally signed by K P SWETHA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

SRI A. MADHEVU AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS S/O LATE A. MADATHAMBADI

¶15

SRI M. UMESHA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O D.M. MADATHAMBADI

¶16

SRI P. MAHADEVASWAMY AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS S/O LATE PUTTATHAMBADI

¶17

SRI D. PRASADA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS S/O LATE DUMMADATHAMBADI

¶18

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:37656-DB CCC No. 1503 of 2025

¶21

CNR: KAHC010753672025

¶22

SRI P. KUMARA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS S/O T. PUTTAIAH

¶23

SRI P. MAHESHA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS S/O LATE PUTTAMADATHAMBADI

¶24

SRI M.M. SHIVAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS S/O JU. MADAIAH

¶25

COMPLAINANT NOS.1 TO 9 ARE HERIDITARY ARCHAKS OF SRI MALAI MAHADESHWARASWAMY TEMPLE THAMBADAGERI MAHADESHWARA HILLS KOLLEGAL (TQ) CHAMARAJ NAGAR (DIST) - 571 490

¶26

SRI MAHESHA

¶27

AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS S/O LATE P.V. NAGATHAMBADI HERIDITARY ARCHAKA RESIDING AT KADOLA M.M. HILLS, KOLLEGAL (TQ) CHAMRAJANAGAR (DIST) - 571 490

¶28

SRI CHIKKAVEERATHAMBADI

¶29

AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS S/O LATE BUDARI MADATHAMBADI HERIDITARY ARCHAKA RESIDING AT KADOLA, M.M.HILLS KOLLEGAL TQ CHAMRAJANAGAR DIST - 571 490

¶30

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

NC: 2026:KHC:37656-DB CCC No. 1503 of 2025

¶33

CNR: KAHC010753672025

¶34

SRI MURGESH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O GOOGAL MADHATHAMBADI HERIDITARY ARCHAKA RESIDING ATKEERANAHOLA, M.M.HILLS KOLLEGAL TQ CHAMRAJANAGAR DIST - 571 490

¶35

…COMPLAINANTS

¶36

(BY MS. LEKHA JAIN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SIDDHARTH SUMAN, ADVOCATE)

¶37

AND:

¶38

SRI DR. M.V. VENKATESH COMMISSIONER FOR RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA CHAMRAJPET BANGALORE - 560 018

¶39

SRI RAJENDRA KUMAR KATARIA SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT (RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS) M.S. BUILDING BANGALORE - 560 001

¶40

SRI. A.E. RAGHU THE SECRETARY SRI MALAI MAHADESHWARASWAMY TEMPLE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MAHADESHWARA HILLS KOLLEGAL (TQ) CHAMARAJ NAGAR(DIST) - 571 490

¶41

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC:37656-DB CCC No. 1503 of 2025

¶44

CNR: KAHC010753672025

¶45

SRI JAGADISH INSPECTOR OF POLICE M.M. HILLS POLICE STATION M.M. HILLS, HANUR TALUK CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT - 571 490

¶46

…ACCUSED

¶47

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT (RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS) M.S. BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001

¶48

…PRO FORMA RESPONDENT

¶49

(BY SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA, AGA FOR ACCUSED NOS. 1, 2, 4 & PRO FORMA RESPONDENT No.5 &

¶50

MR. LIKITH R. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR ACCUSED No.3)

¶51

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971 PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED PERSONS FOR HAVING WILLFULLY DISOBEYED THE ORDER DATED 14.07.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU IN W.P. NO.20667/2025 i.e. ANNEXUREA, AND TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR WILLFULLY AND DELIBERATELY DISOBEYING THE SAID ORDERS PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND FURTHER ENFORCE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW; AND ALSO AWARD COSTS OF THESE PROCEEDINGS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶52

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

NC: 2026:KHC:37656-DB CCC No. 1503 of 2025

¶55

CNR: KAHC010753672025

¶56

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

¶57

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶58

ORAL ORDER

¶59

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

¶60

The complainants have filed the present complaint alleging

¶61

willful disobedience of the interim order dated 14.07.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this court in W.P.No.20667/2025 (GM-TEN).

¶62

Accused No.3 has filed an affidavit, stating that the tender notification dated 25.06.2025 to which the complainants have taken exception is only for the purpose of providing services to the devotees and the maintenance of the concerned precincts, and that the tender notification was never intended to interfere with the right of collection of 'Tatte Kaasu' or the conduct of 'Pooja' either inside the temple or in the temples immediately outside.

¶63

By the interim order dated 14.07.2025, the learned Single Judge had directed "the respondents not to take any steps to interfere with the customary right of collection of 'Tatte Kaasu' ".

¶64

¶65

HC-KAR

¶66

NC: 2026:KHC:37656-DB CCC No. 1503 of 2025

¶67

CNR: KAHC010753672025

¶68

The learned counsel appearing for the accused makes an unequivocal statement that insofar as the prayer offering, that is, "Tatte Kaasu", is concerned, the accused have not obstructed the same in any manner. The said statement is taken on record.

¶69

In view of the said statement, the complaint is closed. If the complainants are able to garner any material to establish the disobedience of the order, which is alleged, it is open to them to revive the present complaint.

¶70

Sd/(VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶71

Sd/(K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE

¶72

KPS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11

Sri M Nagappa v. Sri Dr M v Venkatesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sri M Nagappa v. Sri Dr M v Venkatesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Deveeramma Stone Crushers Vs State of Karnataka

Mrs. Melanie Sebastian Vs Union of India

The Deputy Commissioner, Vs R Venkatachalapathi

Sri Nirmal Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Muninanjajappa Vs State of Karnataka

M/S. Sandesh Enterprises Vs the Excise Commissioner of Karnataka