Smt. Urmila Gandhi vs Smt Narayanamma
2021 Latest Caselaw 3200 Kant

                           -1-


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

    DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2021

                        PRESENT

   THE HON'BLE MR.ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE

                           AND

   THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

             C.C.C NO.44 OF 2021 (CIVIL)

BETWEEN:
1. SMT. URMILA GANDHI
   W/O LATE MOOLENDRA KUMAR GANDHI
   AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS

2. SRI AMITH KUMAR GANDHI
   S/O LATE MOOLENDRA KUMAR GANDHI
   AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

3. SMT. DEEPIKA JAIN
   D/O LATE MOOLENDRA KUMAR GANDHI
   AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

THE COMPLAINANT NOS.1 TO 3 ARE
REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER
SRI AMITH GANDHI

ALL ARE R/AT NO.501/502, 3RD MAIN,
1ST 'B' CROSS, SRINAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 050

4. SRI JINENDRA KUMAR GANDHI
   S/O LATE SRI MOOLCHAND GANDHI
   AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
   C/O MICRO STRAPS
   AVALAHALLI, TIMBER YARD LAYOUT
   MYSORE ROAD, BANGALORE - 26

5. SMT. BABY GANDHI
   W/O JINENDRA KUMAR GANDHI
   AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
   C/O MICRO STRAPS
   AVALAHALLI, TIMBER YARD LAYOUT
                            -2-


  MYSORE ROAD
  BANGALORE - 560 026

(THE COMPLAINANT NOS.4 AND 5 ARE
REP. BY GPA HOLDER
SRI AMITH GANDHI-COMPLAINANT-2)
                                         ... COMPLAINANTS
(BY SHRI PARAS JAIN, ADVOCATE)


AND:
1. SMT. NARAYANAMMA
   W/O LATE ANJAN REDDY
   AGED ABOUT 90 YEARS

2. A. RAM CHANDRA REDDY
   S/O LATE ANJAN REDDY
   AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS

BOTH ARE R/AT NO.41
1ST CROSS, LINK ROAD
MALLESWARAM
BANGALORE - 560 003
                                              ... ACCUSED
(BY SHRI N.VAGEESHA, ADVOCATE)
                            ---
     THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 PRAYING THAT THE ACCUSED
HAVE COMMITTED SERIOUS OFFENCE OF CONTEMPT OF COURT
BY DISOBEYING THE DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE
COURT IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN W.P.NO.39296/2016
C/W    W.P.NOS.39382/2016,    28433/2019,   28432/2019,
28435/2019, 28434/2019, 31405/2019 AND 31420/2019 AND
RFA NO.469/2017, 468/2017 AND 441/2017 DATED 16.01.2020
(ANNEXURE-C) AND AS SUCH THE ACCUSED-1 AND 2 HAVE TO
BE PROSECUTED ACCORDINGLY.

     THIS CCC COMING ON FOR FRAMING OF CHARGE
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE
MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                          ORDER

The learned counsel appearing for the complainants

states that this petition was confined to the direction

contained in the clause (d) of the operative part of the

judgment and order dated 16th January 2020 and the

amount payable as per the said clause (d) has been

deposited by the accused in the Trial Court. He states that

the grievance about the non-compliance regarding payment

of interest at the rate of 12% has been made in another

contempt petition.

2. As this petition was confined to the direction

contained in clause (d) of the operative part of the

judgment and order dated 16th January 2020, in view of the

compliance, no further action is warranted and the petition

is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/-

CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE AHB