Dismissed¶43

B N Ananda v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC25 Jun 2026CCC/415/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil contempt CCC 415/2025, Karnataka HC (DB, Vibhu Bakhru CJ & K.S. Hemalekha J, 25.06.2026); Contempt of Courts Act 1971 sections 11 and 12; wilful disobedience of interim order 31.12.2024 in WP 35692/2024 (GM-KSR); emergent notice; stay of resolutions 07.12.2024 and 25.12.2024; process fee deposited 04.01.2025/08.01.2025; no service of notice; caveat; electronic service 29.12.2024; vakalatnama 08.01.2025; no knowledge of order; cognizance declined; complaint closed; remedies preserved in pending writ petition; Karnataka Societies Registration Act 1960; co-operative society alumni association.

What did the court decide?

No contempt proceedings initiated; complaint closed, with a clarification that the closure does not preclude the complainant from seeking appropriate remedies in the pending writ petition. ¶43

B N Ananda Vs the State of Karnataka — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No contempt proceedings initiated; complaint closed, with a clarification that the closure does not preclude the complainant from seeking appropriate remedies in the pending writ petition.

¶43

Issue for consideration

Whether cognizance of contempt should be taken against accused No.5 for alleged wilful disobedience of the interim order dated 31.12.2024 passed in W.P.No.35692/2024 (GM-KSR) +1 more

¶26

Court's answer

Given the circumstances (absence of service and of any demonstrated knowledge of the interim order), the Court did not consider it apposite to initiate any proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against accused No.5

¶42

Ratio / Principle

Although accused No.5 may have had the means to access a copy of the interim order dated 31.12.2024, the Court found as a fact that the interim order was neither dispatched nor served upon him, and that nothing on record indicates he had knowledge of it

¶41

Key takeaways

The contempt complaint was closedratio¶43
Clarified that the order closing the complaint will not preclude the complainant from seeking appropriate remedies in the pending writ petition (W.P.No.35692/2024)obiter¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, ss. 11 & 12 — Civil contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience of interim order dated 31.12.2024 in W.P.No.35692/2024 (GM-KSR), whereby emergent notice had been ordered to respondent No.5 (Alumni Association of University Vishveshwarayya College of Engineering) and operation of its resolutions dated 07.12.2024 and 25.12.2024 stayed. Held: although accused No.5 had filed a caveat, the writ petition was served electronically on 29.12.2024 and a vakalatnama was filed on 08.01.2025, the interim order itself was neither dispatched nor served upon accused No.5, and nothing on record indicated his knowledge of it; therefore the Court did not consider it apposite to initiate any proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The complaint was closed, it being clarified that the order would not preclude the complainant from seeking appropriate remedies in the pending writ petition.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:31629-DB CCC No. 415 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶8

CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 415 OF 2025

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

B.N. ANANDA S/O K.C. NARASIMAIAH AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS 1971 (ELECTRICITY DIVISION) ASSOCIATION MEMBER NO. 30, VRISHABA ASTAGRAMA BADAVANE MAGADI ROAD CROSS BENGALURU - 560 079

¶11

…COMPLAINANT

¶12

(BY SRI A.V. AMARNATHAN, ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA VIDHANA VEEDI BENAGLURU - 560 001

¶16

(REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY)

¶17

SRI AJAY NAGABHUSHAN ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY THE DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES M.S. BUILDING

¶18

BENGALURU - 560 001

¶19

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:31629-DB CCC No. 415 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

SRI P. SHRIDHAR THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR / DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES SAHAKARA SOUDHA 4^TH CIRCLE, 3^RD MAIN ROAD 8^TH CROSS, MARGOSA ROAD MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU - 560 003

¶22

SRI MANJUNATH CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER / ENQUIRY OFFICER OFFICE OF DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES 4^TH CIRCLE, 3^RD MAIN ROAD 8^TH CROSS, MARGOSA ROAD MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU - 560 003

¶23

KALAIVANAN C SECRETARY ALUMINI ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY VISHVESHWARAYYA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING SILVER JUBILEE BUILDING POST OFFICE ROAD K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 001 REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT,1960

¶24

…ACCUSED

¶25

(SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B.G., AGA FOR ACCUSED No.1 TO 4, SRI JAYAKUMAR S. PATIL, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W SRI DEVIPRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR ACCUSED No.5)

¶26

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE CONTEMPT COMMITTED BY ACCUSED NO.5 AND WILFUL DISOBEYING THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.35692/2024 (GM-KSR) DATED 31.12.2024.

¶27

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:31629-DB CCC No. 415 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶33

ORAL ORDER

¶34

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

¶35

The complainant has filed the present complaint alleging willful disobedience of the interim order dated 31.12.2024. By the said order emergent notice was issued to respondent No.5. (Alumni Association of University, Vishveshwarayya College of Engineering). The court had also directed that the operation of resolutions dated 07.12.2024 and 25.12.2024 be stayed till the next date of hearing.

¶36

Registry in its report states that the process fee was deposited by the complainant on 08.01.2025. However, the record indicates that the complainant had deposited the process fee earlier on 04.01.2025. Although the process fee was deposited earlier, it is apparent from the record that no notice had been served on respondent No.5 pursuant to the order dated 31.12.2024.

¶37

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:31629-DB CCC No. 415 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

The learned Senior Counsel appearing for accused No.5 states that an affidavit is filed affirming that the accused had neither received a copy of the interim order nor any notice of any order having been passed on 31.12.2024. It is also unequivocally affirmed that the accused was not aware of the said order.

¶40

The learned counsel appearing for the complainant submits that accused No.5 ought to have been aware of the order inasmuch as accused No.5 had filed a caveat, and the writ petition was served electronically on 29.12.2024. He also points out that vakalatnama was filed on behalf of accused No.5 on 08.01.2025.

¶41

Whilst accused No.5 may have had the means to access the copy of the interim order, the fact is that the interim order was neither dispatched nor served upon the accused. There is nothing on record to indicate that he had knowledge of the said interim order.

¶42