Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Mr. Bapuram Purushotham Reddy Vs M M Chishty — Contempt of Court | Karnataka HC (2026)

Home
Karnataka HC
2026
Mr. Bapuram Purushotham Reddy Vs M M ChishtyMr. Bapuram Purushotham Reddy v. M M Chishty

Disposed¶¶42

Mr. Bapuram Purushotham Reddy v. M M Chishty

Karnataka HC8 Jan 2026CCC/801/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court Division Bench (Anu Sivaraman and Vijaykumar A. Patil JJ.; order per Vijaykumar A. Patil J.), C.C.C. No.801/2024, decided 08.01.2026. Complainants Bapuram Purushotham Reddy and Bapuram Visalakshi sought initiation of civil contempt under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 r/w Article 215 of the Constitution against M.M. Chishty, Assistant General Manager, Punjab National Bank, for alleged non-compliance with the Single Judge's order dated 10.05.2022 in W.P.No.9346/2022 (GM-RES). The interim order had been extended only for two weeks by order dated 27.06.2023; the bank's auction took place on 18.09.2023, after that period; the writ petition was later disposed of with liberty to approach the DRT, where proceedings were initiated. Held: no willful disobedience; contempt petition devoid of merit and dropped; notice to the accused discharged. No precedent was cited or discussed.

What did the court decide?

No punishment imposed: contempt proceedings dropped and notice issued to the accused discharged. ¶¶42

Why is it important?

In view of the specific order dated 27.06.2023 of the learned Single Judge, by which the interim order was extended only for two weeks, and considering that the auction took place after two weeks from the said date, there is no willful disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge as alleged. ¶¶36

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No punishment imposed: contempt proceedings dropped and notice issued to the accused discharged.

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused, the Authorized Officer of Punjab National Bank, committed willful disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge dated 10.05.2022 in W.P.No.9346/2022.

Court's answer

In view of the specific order dated 27.06.2023 of the learned Single Judge, by which the interim order was extended only for two weeks, and considering that the auction took place after two weeks from the said date, there is no willful disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge as alleged.

Ratio / Principle

The contempt petition is devoid of merit and the same is dropped; notice issued to the accused is discharged.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil contempt — Petition under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India against the Authorized Officer (Assistant General Manager) of Punjab National Bank for alleged willful disobedience of the learned Single Judge's order dated 10.05.2022 in W.P.No.9346/2022 (GM-RES), as extended from time to time — By order dated 27.06.2023 the interim order had been extended only for a period of two weeks — Auction was conducted by the bank on 18.09.2023, i.e., after the said two-week period — Writ petition was later disposed of with liberty to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), where proceedings were already initiated — Held: in view of the specific order dated 27.06.2023 and the auction having taken place after two weeks therefrom, there is no willful disobedience of the learned Single Judge's order as alleged; the contempt petition is devoid of merit and is dropped; notice issued to the accused is discharged.

A

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1171-DB C.C.C. No.801/2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.801/2024

BETWEEN:

MR. BAPURAM PURUSHOTHAM REDDY AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS S/O SRI. B.V.R. REDDY.

Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM Location: High Court Of Karnataka

MRS. BAPURAM VISALAKSHI AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS W/O MR. B. PURUSHOTHAMA REDDY.

BOTH ARE R/AT PLOT NO.279 MLA AND MPS COLONY ROAD NO.10C, JUBILEE HILLS HYDERABAD 500 033.

…COMPLAINANTS

(BY SMT. RUPA B. DEVARAJU AND SRI. GOPALA KRISHNA, ADVS., FOR SRI. SHARATH S. GOGI, ADV.,)

AND:

M.M. CHISHTY THE ASST. GENERAL MANAGER PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK CIRCLE SASTRA CENTRE BANGALORE EAST 1st FLOOR, RAHEJA TOWERS

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1171-DB C.C.C. No.801/2024

HC-KAR

26-27 M G ROAD BANGALORE 560001.

…ACCUSED

(BY SRI. SHETTY VIGNESH SHIVARAM, ADV.,)

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF CIVIL CONTEMPT AGAINST THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER THE ACCUSED BANK FOR DISOBEYED BY NOT COMPLYING WITH THE DIRECTION AS ORDERED BY TH LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT, IN WP NO.9346/2022(GM-RES), DATED 10.05.2022 AND THE SAME HAS BEEN EXTENDED FROM TIME TO TIME, WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-B AND PUNISH THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER OF THE ACCUSED BANK, IN ACCORDANCE WIT LAW IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)

This contempt petition has been filed alleging willful disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge

dated 10.05.2022 passed in W.P.No.9346/2022.

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:1171-DB C.C.C. No.801/2024

HC-KAR

The respondent entered appearance, filed

objections and also produced the entire order sheet of the proceedings before the learned Single Judge.

The order of the learned Single Judge dated 27.06.2023, indicates that the interim order granted earlier was extended only for a period of two weeks. The statement of objections filed indicates that the auction was conducted by the bank on 18.09.2023. The order dated 10.10.2023 of the learned Single Judge records the other events taken place between the parties. It is pointed out that the writ petition was later disposed of with liberty to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and they have already initiated the proceedings.

In view of the specific order dated 27.06.2023 of the learned Single Judge and considering that the auction took place after two weeks from the said date, we are of the view that there is no willful disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge as alleged. The contempt

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1171-DB C.C.C. No.801/2024

HC-KAR

petition is therefore devoid of merit and the same is

dropped .

Notice issued to the accused is discharged

Sd/(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE

Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

ABK

List No.: 3 Sl No.: 18

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the accused, the Authorized Officer of Punjab National Bank, committed willful disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge dated 10.05.2022 in W.P.No.9346/2022.¶¶29
The court held
In view of the specific order dated 27.06.2023 of the learned Single Judge, by which the interim order was extended only for two weeks, and considering that the auction took place after two weeks from the said date, there is no willful disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge as alleged.ratio¶¶36

Statutes considered

2 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971Sections 11 and 12¶¶23
Constitution of IndiaArticle 215¶¶23

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order dated 10.05.2022 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.9346/2022 (GM-RES), alleged to have been wilfully disobeyed by the accused bank officer; directions therein were extended from time to time.¶¶30
High Court of Karnataka (learned Single Judge) · 10.05.2022
Prior proceeding
Learned Single Judge's order dated 10.05.2022 in W.P.No.9346/2022 (GM-RES) was extended from time to time (Annexure-B); alleged non-compliance gave rise to this contempt petition.¶¶23
Prior proceeding
By order dated 27.06.2023, the learned Single Judge extended the earlier interim order only for a period of two weeks.¶¶35
Prior proceeding
As per the statement of objections, the auction was conducted by the bank on 18.09.2023, i.e., after the two-week period expired.¶¶35
Prior proceeding
The learned Single Judge's order dated 10.10.2023 recorded the other events that had taken place between the parties.¶¶35
Prior proceeding
The writ petition was later disposed of with liberty to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), and proceedings have already been initiated there.¶¶35

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Mr. Bapuram Purushotham Reddy¶¶9
Smt. Rupa B. Devaraju, Sri. Gopala Krishna, Sri. Sharath S. Gogi
petitioner
Mrs. Bapuram Visalakshi¶¶11
Smt. Rupa B. Devaraju, Sri. Gopala Krishna, Sri. Sharath S. Gogi
respondent
M.M. Chishty, Assistant General Manager, Punjab National Bank¶¶16
Sri. Shetty Vignesh Shivaram

Coram

AI extract

Anu Sivaramanmember¶¶25
Vijaykumar A. Patilauthor¶¶28

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 8 Jan 2026 · January
Registered: 31 Jul 2024
Case no.: CCC/801/2024
CNR: KAHC010440202024
Topic: Contempt of Court
Bench: Anu Sivaraman Vijaykumar A. Patil
Disposal: DROPPED
Case type: C.C.C. (Civil Contempt Petition)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Anu Sivaraman Vijaykumar A. Patil

S Mahadevaswamy Vs the Commissioner of Police
7 Jan 2026
Kantharaju Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer
6 Jan 2026
The State of Karnataka Vs Sri R S Raju
6 Jan 2026
Mr H L Nagaraja Vs M/S Siddhshekha Developers LLP
8 Jan 2026
A M Akbar Ali Vs Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Ltd.
8 Jan 2026
Sri. S. v. Ravindra Vs the State of Karnataka
8 Jan 2026

Cite this judgement

Mr. Bapuram Purushotham Reddy v. M M Chishty, CCC/801/2024 (KA), decided on 8 January 2026.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes2

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971Sections 11 and 12
Constitution of IndiaArticle 215

View all statutes

Procedural history6

Order dated 10.05.2022 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.9346/2022 (GM-RES), alleged to have been wilfully disobeyed by the accused bank officer; directions therein were extended from time to time.High Court of Karnataka (learned Single Judge) · 10.05.2022
Learned Single Judge's order dated 10.05.2022 in W.P.No.9346/2022 (GM-RES) was extended from time to time (Annexure-B); alleged non-compliance gave rise to this contempt petition.
By order dated 27.06.2023, the learned Single Judge extended the earlier interim order only for a period of two weeks.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Anu Sivaraman and Vijaykumar A. Patil

Parties & counsel