Disposed¶58

Smt. L M Prabhaavathy v. Kumar Naik

Karnataka HC9 Apr 2026CCC/29/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

civil contempt CCC 29/2023 Karnataka HC; contempt of courts act 1971 s.11 s.12; non-compliance W.P.No.50561/2019 order 18.11.2019; BDA Commissioner Kumar Naik; SLAO Dr. B.S. Basanthi; alternate site allotment site no.22 sy. no. 21/2 matadahalli village bangalore north taluk; endorsement 30.06.2023 additional land acquisition officer; compensation deposited sec. 30, 31(2) land acquisition act; section 16(2) notification possession 30.08.1975 vested in authority; no willful disobedience; contentions left open appropriate proceedings; contempt case closed notice discharged.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings not initiated; the Contempt of Court Case is closed, the complainant's contentions being left open for agitation in appropriate proceedings, and notice, if any, issued stands discharged. ¶58

Smt. L M Prabhaavathy Vs Kumar Naik — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶58

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused disobeyed the order dated 18.11.2019 in W.P.No.50561/2019 such that contempt proceedings should be initiated against them and they punished in accordance with law. +1 more

¶24

Court's answer

Having considered the contentions, the Court is of the opinion that there is no willful disobedience or contempt of the directions issued by it in W.P.No.50561/2019; the respondents' submission of the 30.06.2023 endorsement constitutes compliance, and the contempt case warrants no punitive action.

¶49

Ratio / Principle

Since the complaint reduces to the propriety of the rejection of the complainant's request, she is left free to take up the matter in appropriate proceedings with all her contentions open; on this basis the Contempt of Court Case is closed and any notice issued stands discharged.

¶56

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CCC No. 29 of 2023 (High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru; DB coram Anu Sivaraman and Tara Vitasta Ganju JJ.; judgment per Anu Sivaraman J.; decided 09.04.2026). Filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 by Smt. L.M. Prabhaavathy against the Commissioner and the Special Land Acquisition Officer, BDA, alleging non-compliance of the order dated 18.11.2019 in W.P.No.50561/2019, which had directed the respondents to consider her representations dated 13.06.2012 and 2.5.2019 and decide within eight weeks. Counsel for the accused produced an endorsement dated 30.06.2023 recording that Sy. No. 21/2 of Matadahalli village was acquired (possession taken 30.08.1975), a Section 16 (2) Notification published and the property vested in BDA, with compensation deposited under Sec. 30, 31 (2) of the Land Acquisition Act, and informing the complainant to avail compensation by establishing her right before the Court. The Court found no willful disobedience or contempt of its directions; observing that the grievance concerned the impropriety of the rejection, it left the complainant's contentions open for appropriate proceedings, closed the Contempt Case and discharged the notices. No precedents were cited; no quantum was adjudicated.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:19807-DB CCC No. 29 of 2023

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 29 OF 2023

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT. L.M.PRABHAAVATHY D/O. LATE L.S.MAHADEVAN, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT NO. 1426, 13^TH CROSS, PIPELINE ROAD, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, 2^ND STAGE, MAHALAKSHMI PURAM, BENGALURU-560 086.

¶11

…COMPLAINANT

¶12

(BY SRI. SUNDARESH.H.C., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

KUMAR NAIK

¶15

Digitally signed by TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA

¶16

THE COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, KUMARA PARK WEST, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BANGALORE-560 020.

¶17

DR. B.S.BASANTHI

¶18

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, KUMARA PARK WEST, T.CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BANGALORE-560 020.

¶19

…ACCUSED

¶20

(BY SRI. MURUGESH.V.CHARATI., ADVOCATE)

¶21

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, BY THE COMPLAINANT, WHEREIN SHE PRAYS THAT THE HON’BLE COURT BE PLEASED

¶22

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:19807-DB CCC No. 29 of 2023

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR DISOBEYING THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.50561/2019 DATED 18.11.2019 AS PER THE ANNEXURE-A AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶27

& HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

¶28

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶29

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

¶30

This Contempt of Court Case is filed alleging non-

¶31

compliance of the order dated 18.11.2019 in W.P.No.50561/2019. The directions issued therein, read

¶32

as follows:

¶33

“2. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that interest of justice would be subserved in directing the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 13.06.2012 and 2.5.2019 at Annexures L and M respectively and take a decision in the matter in accordance with law in an expedite manner, in any event, not later than eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. Ordered accordingly.”

¶34

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents

¶35

/ accused submits that an endorsement has been issued as

¶36

on 30.06.2023, which reads as follows:

¶37

¶38

NC: 2026:KHC:19807-DB CCC No. 29 of 2023

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

“ENDORSEMENT

¶41

Sub: Request for allotment of an alternate site for site bearing No. 22 situated in Sy. No. 21/2 of Matadahalli Village, Bangalore North Taluk.

¶42

Ref: Order dated 18.11.2019 in W.P.No. 50561/2019 (BDA)

¶43

¶44

Sy. No. 21/2 measuring 1-acre 19-guntas of Matadahalli village, Bangalore North Taluk, has been notified under preliminary and final notification for formation of layout. The award has been approved for the said land. On 30.08.1975 the possession of the property has been taken over and handed over to Engineering Section of the BDA. The compensation for the land has been deposited in the Court under Sec. 30, 31 (2) of the Land Acquisition Act. Section 16 (2) Notification under Land Acquisition Act has been published and the property has vested in the authority.

¶45

The report from the Engineering Section has been obtained with regard to utilisation of site bearing No.22 in Sy. No. 21/2 of Matadahalli, Bangalore North Taluk. It has been reported that BDA has formed a layout in Sy. No. 21/2 of Matadahalli village.

¶46

Since the compensation amount has been deposited under Sec. 30, 31 (2) of the Land Acquisition Act in respect of Sy. No. 21/2 of Matadahalli village, measuring 1-acre 19-guntas, you are hereby informed to avail the compensation by establishing your right before the Hon'ble Court.

¶47

ADDL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BDA, BANGALORE.”

¶48

3. Having considered the contentions advanced,

¶49

we are of the opinion that there is no willful disobedience

¶50

or contempt of the directions issued by this Court. The

¶51

¶52

NC: 2026:KHC:19807-DB CCC No. 29 of 2023

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

contention of the complainant is that the rejection of the

¶55

request made by the complainant, is not proper.

¶56

If that be so, it is for the complainant to take up the matter in appropriate proceedings. Leaving open the contentions of the complainant to be agitated in appropriate proceedings, the Contempt of Court Case is

¶57

closed.

¶58