Mrs. Shashikala Vs Sri L Sreenivasa Murthy — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2026)

Mrs. Shashikala Vs Sri L Sreenivasa Murthy — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No contempt proceedings initiated and no punishment imposed; the complaint was closed, with express liberty to the complainant to seek clarification or modification of the order dated 19.06.2025 or any other remedies in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused committed willful disobedience of the interim order dated 19.06.2025 passed in CRP.No.425/2025 (stay/status-quo over residential site No.19 formed out of Sy.No.50/3, Matadahalli village, Sulthanpalya, Kasaba Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk), warranting initiation of proceedings and punishment under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the above, the Court did not consider it apposite to initiate any proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and the complaint was closed.

Ratio / Principle

Although the JDA dated 14.12.2023 is part of the record, the complainant has not sought any clarification as to identification of the land in question.

Key takeaways

Clarified that the order closing the complaint will not preclude the complainant from seeking clarification or modification of the order dated 19.06.2025, disobedience of which is alleged, or any other remedies, albeit in accordance with law.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Sections 11 and 12 - Civil Contempt Petition alleging willful disobedience of interim order of stay dated 19.06.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in CRP.No.425/2025 (prayed in I.A.No.1/2025, which is not on record) - Scheduled property: residential site No.19 formed out of Sy.No.50/3, Matadahalli village, Sulthanpalya, Kasaba Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk - Accused contended that under the Joint Development Agreement dated 14.12.2023 (part of record) construction is confined to sites earlier forming part of Sy.No.53/1 and none is undertaken on Sy.No.50/3 - Complainant had not sought clarification as to identification of the land in question - Held: not apposite to initiate proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971; complaint closed - Liberty expressly reserved to complainant to seek clarification or modification of the order dated 19.06.2025 or any other remedies in accordance with law.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:30654-DB CCC No. 1613 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JUNE, 2026

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 1613 OF 2025

BETWEEN:

MRS. SHASHIKALA W/O MR. T.L. RANGAIAH SHETTY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/A NO.358, SHIVA TEMPLE ROAD CHIKKABALLAPUR TOWN CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 561 201

REP BY HER GPA HOLDER: MR. KOIRADA VENKATASWAMY GOVARDHAN AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT NO. 36, RAMAKRISHNAPPA ROAD COX TOWN, FRASER TOWN BANGALORE - 560 005

Digitally signed by VEERENDRA KUMAR K M Location: High Court of Karnataka

(BY SRI SHATHABISH SHIVANNA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

…COMPLAINANT

SRI L. SREENIVASA MURTHY S/O LAKSHMINARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT NO.14, 1^ST MAIN ROAD SULTHANPALYA, R.T. NAGAR BENGALURU - 560 032

…ACCUSED

(BY SRI ABHIJIT HARANAHALLI, ADVOCATE)

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:30654-DB CCC No. 1613 of 2025

HC-KAR

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 PRAYING TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR THE WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED 19.06.2025 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN CRP NO.425/2025 HEREIN PROUDCED AS ANNEXURE-A.

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

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

ORAL ORDER

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

The complainant has filed the present complaint alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 19.06.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in CRP.No.425/2025. The Court had passed an interim order of stay as prayed for by the complainant in I.A.No.1/2025 filed in the said revision petition.

The said application is not on record. However, the learned counsel appearing for the complainant submits that the complainant has prayed for status-quo to be maintained in respect

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:30654-DB CCC No. 1613 of 2025

HC-KAR

of the scheduled property. The scheduled property is described as residential site bearing site No.19, formed out of Sy.No.50/3 situated at Matadahalli village, Sulthanpalya, Kasaba Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk.

The learned counsel appearing for the accused submits that in terms of the Joint Development Agreement [ JDA ] dated 14.12.2023, a copy of which is placed on record, the construction is being carried out on different sites, which were earlier as part of Sy.No.53/1 and not on land comprising Sy.No.50/3. According to the accused, no development is being undertaken on the land comprising Sy.No.50/3. Although the JDA is part of the record, the complainant has not sought for any clarification as to identification of the land in question.

In view of the above, we do not consider it apposite to initiate any proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The complaint is, accordingly, closed.

We, however, clarify that this order will not preclude the complainant from seeking clarification or modification of the order

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:30654-DB CCC No. 1613 of 2025

HC-KAR

dated 19.06.2025, disobedience of which is alleged, or any other

remedies, albeit in accordance with law.

Sd/(VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/(K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE

KMV

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14