Karnataka High Court
Sri Nadeem A S vs Smt Bharathi on 6 July, 2021
Author: Chief Justice Govindaraj
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
CCC NO.444 OF 2021 (CIVIL)
BETWEEN
SRI. NADEEM.A.S.
S/O H.S. AMANULLA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT NO.386, 2ND MAIN, 4TH
CROSS DARGA MOHALLA,
VIJINAPURA
BENGALURU-560 016
... COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI. N.R. NAIK, ADVOCATE OF N.R. NAIK & ASSOCIATES-VC)
AND:
1 . SMT. BHARATHI
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION
OFFICER
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA
DEVELOPMENT BOARD (METRO RAIL
PROJECT)
1ST FLOOR, R.P. BUILDING
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-
560 001
2 . SRI. R. SHIVASHANKAR
S/O M. RAMESH
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
R/ AT NO.24, MUNIRAYAPPA ROAD
NANDIDURGA ROAD, JAYAMAHAL
EXTENSION
BENGALURU-560 046
3 . SRI. MADAN MOHAN
AGED: MAJOR
2
REP. BY HIS PARTNER
SMT. ANNAPOORNAMMA
NO.565, ANANDARAM COMPLEX
AVENUE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 002
4 . SRI. NOUSHAD
S/O K.H. ADAM
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
NO.132/A, 2ND CROSS, ITI COLONY
VIJINAPURA, DOORAVANI NAGAR POST
BANGALORE-560 016
... ACCUSED
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO CALL THE
RESPONDENT/ACCUSED BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT AND TO
INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDING FOR DISOBEYED THE ORDER
PASSED IN W.P.NO.4515/2021 (LA-KIADB) DATED 16.04.2021
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D AS THE ACCUSED NO.1 AUTHORITY IS
NOT COMPLIED THE DIRECTION ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT AND
PUNISH HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THROUGH
VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
complainant. The breach alleged is of the judgment and order
dated 16th April 2021 passed by the learned Single Judge of
this Court. The prayers made in the petition in which this
judgment and order was passed are very relevant which read
thus:
"a. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd and
3rd respondents not to disburse the amount in
pursuance of the notification No.CI 130 SPQ(E) 2020
dated 24.08.2020 which is produced at Annexure-C in
favour of the respondents 5 to 7 which are deposited
in LAC No.71/2019 and other claim petitions pending
before City Civil Court CCH-17 Bengaluru City,
Bengaluru:
b. to direct the respondents 5 to 7 to resolve their
claim in pendency of LAC No.71/2019 and other claim
petition pending before City Civil Court CCH-17
Bengaluru City, Bengaluru vide Annexure-E"
2. In paragraph 3 of the judgment and order, the learned
Single Judge has noted the submission of the petitioner that
the compensation in respect of acquired land bearing Survey
No.87 measuring 4 acres 25 guntas situated at Vijanapura
(Kothur) Village, Mahadevapura Hobli, (Old K.R.Puram Hobli),
Bengaluru East Taluk has been deposited in LAC No.71/2019
on the file of the II Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bangalore and has observed that the said submission is
factually incorrect. The learned Single Judge has referred to
the order sheet by pointing out that the said LAC No.71/2019
is in respect of the land in Survey No.73/1A of the same
village. Therefore, the specific prayer (a) was not granted.
3. Paragraph 4 of the said order reads thus:-
"4. Learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3/KIADB
and learned counsel for respondent No.4/BMRCL
submit that the subject land bearing Sy.No.87
measuring 4 acres 25 guntas has not been acquired
and as such question of issuing any directions in
favour of the petitioner does not arise. The said
submission is placed on record.
Under these circumstances, this petition is
disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the
petitioner to take appropriate steps in respect of the
subject land bearing Sy.No.87 measuring 4 acres 25
guntas referred to supra.
It is further made clear that in the event the
subject land bearing Sy.No.87 measuring 4 acres 25
guntas is already acquired/will be acquired in the
future, the respondents 2 to 4 will issue notices to the
petitioners as well as respondents 5 to 7 and also
other interested persons before taking steps to
disbursement/payment in favour of the persons
entitled to compensation.
Petition stands disposed of accordingly"
4. Thus, the learned Single Judge has accepted the
contention raised by the second to fourth respondents in the
Writ Petition that the land bearing Sy.No.87 measuring 4 acres
25 guntas has not been acquired. Consequently, two
directions which are referred above have been issued.
5. The complainant is relying upon the legal notice dated
28th May 2021, by which, the advocate for the complainant
called upon the third and fourth respondents in the Writ
Petition not to disburse the amount of compensation deposited
in the Court. It is not even the case made out in the said
notice that after the order dated 16th April 2021 was passed
by the learned Single Judge, any proceedings for acquisition
have been initiated in respect of the land in Survey No.87
measuring 4 acres 25 guntas.
6. Hence, no case is made out to initiate action under the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Accordingly, the petition is
disposed of.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
Prs*
