Disposed¶62

Dr. Renuka Prasad K v. Vs Dr. K.V. Chidananda

Karnataka HC25 Jun 2026CCC/162/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil contempt; violation of interim order dated 03.12.2021 in MFA No.4288/2021 (stay of blanket injunction; no resolutions for removal of respondent No.3; participation in society meetings); resolutions allegedly in violation; Court declines to consider merits; contempt case closed with liberty reserved to challenge resolution in accordance with law; all contentions open; Section 12 Contempts of Courts Act; Academy of Liberal Education Sullia; Karnataka HC DB; Anu Sivaraman; Venkatesh Naik T.

What did the court decide?

The merits of the matter do not have to be considered in these contempt proceedings. ¶62

Dr. Renuka Prasad K v Vs Dr. K.V. Chidananda — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:31723-DB CCC No. 162 of 2022

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶8

AND

¶9

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.162 OF 2022

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

DR. RENUKA PRASAD K.V. S/O. DR. KURUNJI VENKATARAMANA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS OCCUPATION: GENERAL SECRETARY ACADEMY OF LIBERAL EDUCATION SULLIA, DAKSHINA KANNADA HAVING ITINERATE/CAMP OFFICE WITHIN THE PRECINCTS OF KVG INDUSTRIAL TRAINING INSTITUTE BHAGAMANDALA MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU - 571 247.

¶12

…COMPLAINANT

¶13

(BY SRI A. MADHUSUDHANA RAO, ADVOCATE)

¶14

Digitally signed by RAKSHA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

AND:

¶16

DR. K.V. CHIDANANDA S/O. DR. KURUNJI VENKATARAMANA GOWDA AGED 65 YEARS DESIGNATED AS THE PRESIDENT OF M/S. ACADEMY OF LIBERAL EDUCATION SULLIA, DAKSHINA KANNADA RESIDENT OF VENKATESHANILAYA KURUNJI HOUSE, SHRIRAMPET SULLIA DAKSHINA KANNADA-574 327.

¶17

SHRI K.V. HEMANATH S/O. LATE K.M. VISHWANATH GOWDA AGED 64 YEARS

¶18

DESIGNATED AS THE JOINT SECRETARY

¶19

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:31723-DB CCC No. 162 of 2022

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

M/S. ACADEMY OF LIBERAL EDUCATION SULLIA, DAKSHINA KANNADA C/O. KURUNJI HOUSE PARIVARAKANA, SULLIA POST AND TALUK DAKSHINA KANNDA.

¶22

SMT. SHOBHA CHIDANANDA W/O. DR. K.V. CHIDANANDA AGED 62 YEARS DESIGNATED AS THE DIRECTOR M/S. ACADEMY OF LIBERAL EDUCATION SULLIA, DAKSHINA KANNADA RESIDING AT VENKATESHANILAYA KURUNJI HOUSE, SHRIRAMPET SULLIA DAKSHINA KANNADA - 574 327.

¶23

MR. AKSHAY K.C. S/O. DR. K.V. CHIDANANDA AGED 30 YEARS PROVISIONALLY DESIGNATED AS THE DIRECTOR (NOW LAPSED) M/S. ACADEMY OF LIBERAL EDUCATION SULLIA, DAKSHINA KANNADA RESIDING AT VENKATESHANILAYA KURUNJI HOUSE, SHRIRAMPET SULLIA DAKSHINA KANNADA-574 327.

¶24

DR. M.S. AISHWARYA D/O. DR. K.V. CHIDANANDA AGED 35 YEARS WRONGLY DESIGNATED AS THE DIRECTOR M/S. ACADEMY OF LIBERAL EDUCATION SULLIA, DAKSHINA KANNADA C/O. GANGOTRI NURSING HOME BTM LAYOUT BENGALURU.

¶25

DR. MR. GAUTHAM S/O. SHRI LINGEGOWDA AGED 37 YEARS WRONGLY DESIGNATED AS THE DIRECTOR M/S. ACADEMY OF LIBERAL EDUCATION SULLIA, DAKSHINA KANNADA

¶26

¶27

NC: 2026:KHC:31723-DB CCC No. 162 of 2022

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

C/O. GANGOTRI NURSING HOME BTM LAYOUT, BENGALURU.

¶30

…ACCUSED

¶31

(BY SRI CYRIL PRASAD PAIS, ADVOCATE)

¶32

¶33

THIS CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE CONTEMPTS OF COURT ACT, PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE ACTS OF CONTEMPT DETAILED IN PARAGRAPH NO.42(a) TO (h) ABOVE COMMITTED BY THE ACCUSED PERSONS JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY IN THE TEETH OF ORDER DATED 3-12-2021 PASSED IN MFA NO.4288 OF 2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-J BY THE HON'BLE SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT, SECURE, CHARGE, TRY AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED.

¶34

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

¶35

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

¶36

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶37

(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)

¶38

The present Contempt of Court Case is filed alleging

¶39

non-compliance with the order dated 03.12.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in MFA No.4288/2021, which reads as follows:

¶40

¶41

NC: 2026:KHC:31723-DB CCC No. 162 of 2022

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

"Heard. Admit.

¶44

ORDER ON I.A.No.2/2021 IN M.F.A.No.4283/2021 & ORDER ON I.A.No.1/2021 IN M.F.A.No.4288/2021

¶45

Learned Counsel for the appellants submits memo with copies of the documents.

¶46

The said documents show that regarding the same dispute, respondent No.1 filed W.P.No.8960/2021 before this Court against the appellants and others. In that writ petition, direction was given to the Registrar of the Society to conduct enquiry.

¶47

After holding enquiry on 20.11.2021 the Registrar has given his decision in favour of the appellants.

¶48

Learned Counsel for the respondents submits that they are contemplating to challenge the said order.

¶49

The trial Court has granted blanket injunction without reference to the order of this Court in W.P.No.8960/2021. On such order, the entire business of the society is brought to stand still. It is just and appropriate to stay the impugned order. Therefore, interim stay of the impugned order in the above appeals with condition that the appellants shall not pass any resolution for removal of respondent No.3 till disposal of the appeals.

¶50

The appellants shall permit respondent No.3 to participate in the meetings of plaintiff No.1’s society and its business according to the applicable rules.

¶51

The applications in the above appeals are disposed of accordingly."

¶52

¶53

NC: 2026:KHC:31723-DB CCC No. 162 of 2022

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

The learned counsel for the complainant submits

¶56

that the aforesaid directions have been violated and that resolutions have been passed in violation of the said direction.

¶57

A detailed statement of objection has been filed by accused Nos.1 to 6 contending that there has been no violation with the directions issued by this Court. The learned counsel appearing for the accused submits that, in respect of an identical issue, Contempt of Court Case No.205/2022 was disposed of by this Court by order dated 02.06.2023, reserving liberty to challenge the resolution, if so advised. It is further contended that the challenge against the resolution has been repelled and the matter has been taken up to the Apex Court. It is further submitted that the MFAs in which the interim orders were passed have already been disposed of.

¶58

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the complainant submits that the present Contempt of Court Case may also be disposed of by reserving liberty to the complainant to challenge the resolution, if so advised.

¶59

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:31723-DB CCC No. 162 of 2022

¶60

HC-KAR

¶61

Having considered the rival contentions, we are of

¶62

the opinion that the merits of the matter do not have to be considered in these proceedings. Accordingly, the Contempt of Court Case stands closed , reserving liberty to the complainant to challenge the resolution in accordance with law. In case such challenge has already been instituted, the same shall be considered in accordance with law.

¶63

All contentions of the parties are left open.

¶64

Sd/(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE

¶65

Sd/(VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE

¶66

¶67

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 8

Dr. Renuka Prasad K v. Vs Dr. K.V. Chidananda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Renuka Prasad K v. Vs Dr. K.V. Chidananda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr R Bharathi Vs Smt R Manjula

Sri G B Siddesh Vs Smt Gowramma

Sri Manjunath C M Vs Smt Rashmi N

Smt. Muniyamma Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Dr M Shivalingegowda Vs Mr Malleshwarappa S

Goldie Sharma Vs Vaishnavi Prabhakaran