Shri. M. Sonnegowda vs Smt. Sujatha Ram
2022 Latest Caselaw 8676 Kant

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8676 Kant
Judgement Date : 13 June, 2022

Karnataka High Court

Shri. M. Sonnegowda vs Smt. Sujatha Ram on 13 June, 2022

Bench: Chief Justice, C.M. Poonacha

                          -1-


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                      PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE

                          AND

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

            C.C.C NO.357 OF 2022 (CIVIL)

BETWEEN

1 . SHRI. M. SONNEGOWDA
    S/O. LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA,
    AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
    (SENIOR CITIZENSHIP NOT CLAIMED)
    OCC: AGRICULTURE

2 . SHRI. M. GOPALAPPA
    S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA,
    AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
    OCC: AGRICULTURE

3 . SMT. MUNIRATHNAMMA
    D/O. LATE NANJEGOWDA,
    W/O. B. V. VENKATESHAPPA,
    AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
    (SENIOR CITIZENSHIP NOT CLAIMED)
    OCC: AGRICULTURE

4 . SMT. MUNIYAMMA
    D/O. LATE NANJEGOWDA,
    W/O. LATE G. VENKATESHAPPA,
    AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
    (SENIOR CITIZENSHIP NOT CLAIMED)

5 . SMT. SAVITHRAMMA
    D/O. LATE NANJEGOWDA,
    W/O. LATE K. KRISHNAPPA,
    AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
    (SENIOR CITIZENSHIP NOT CLAIMED)

6 . SHRI. NAGARAJ GOWDA
                             -2-


      S/O. LATE NANJEGOWDA,
      AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
      OCC: AGRICULTURE,
      WORKING IN PRIVATE COMPANY

7 . SHRI. N. CHANDRAPPA
    S/O. LATE NANJEGOWDA,
    AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
    OCC: AGRICULTURE

8 . SMT. BHAGYAMMA
    D/O. LATE NANJEGOWDA,
    W/O. D. S. VENKATARAMAPPA,
    AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

      ALL ARE RESIDING AT
      ANGONDAHALLI VILLAGE,
      AVANI HOBLI,
      MULBAGAL TALUK,
      KOLAR DISTRICT-563 131.
                                          ...COMPLAINANTS
(BY SRI G. A. SRIKANTE GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

AND

1 . SMT. SUJATHA RAM
    THE TAHSILDAR,
    K.G.F. TALUK,
    KOLAR GOLD FIELDS,
    KOLAR DISTRICT-563 122.

2 . SHRI. RAMASHEKAR REDDY G. S.
    S/O. SHRI. G. R. SRIRAMAREDDY,
    OCC: AGRICULTURE,
    R/AT GENNERAHALLI VILLAGE,
    BETHAMANGALA HOBLI,
    KGF TALUK,
    KOLAR DISTRICT-563 116.

3 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
    REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
    DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
    VIKASA SOUDHA,
    BENGALURU-560 001.

4 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
    KOLAR DISTRICT,
    KOLAR-563 101.
                              -3-



5 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
    KOLAR SUB DIVISION,
    KOLAR-563 101.
                                             ...ACCUSED
(BY SRI H.R.SHOWRI, AGA FOR R1;
SRI VARUN PAPIREDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R4 AND R5 ARE DELETED AS PER ORDER DATED 22.04.2022)

      THIS CCC   IS FILED UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, BY THE COMPLAINANT, WHEREIN
HE PRAYS THAT THE HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO
INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED
NO.1 AND 2 TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED 1 AND 2 UNDER
CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT.

     THIS CCC COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE MADE
THE FOLLOWING:

                           ORDER

Accused No.1-Smt.Sujatha Ram, Tahsildar, K.G.F.

Taluk, Kolar Gold Fields, Kolar District, is present before the

Court. The compliance affidavit filed today by accused No.1

is taken on record.

2. This contempt petition arises out of the order

dated 22.02.2022 passed in W.P.No.1568/2022. On the

last date, i.e., 10.06.2022, we had passed the following

order:-

"Accused No.1-Smt.Sujatha Ram, Tahsildar, K.G.F.Taluk, Kolar Gold Fields, Kolar District is present before the Court.

2. Learned counsel for the complainants submits that the

writ Court, vide order dated 22.02.2022 in W.P.No.1568/2022, had stayed the impugned order dated 08.12.2021 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar District, however, in blatant disregard to the writ Court's order, accused No.1, vide order dated 18.03.2022, has changed the entries by deleting the names of the complainants and recorded the name of accused No.2, on the basis of the Deputy Commissioner's order dated 08.12.2021. The submission is that accused No.1 was in full knowledge of the order passed by the writ Court and in order to help accused No.2, had willfully and intentionally disobeyed the writ Court's order and made the said entry which amounts to committing contempt of this Court.

3. We are, prima facie, satisfied that accused No.1 has committed contempt of this Court. Accused No.1, at this stage, has made an unconditional apology before the Court and submitted that one opportunity be provided to rectify her mistake. She has no intention to disobey or disregard the writ Court's order. It is submitted that within 24 hours, necessary correction in the revenue records would be carried out and formal orders in this regard would be issued.

4. On the request of learned Additional Government Advocate, we grant one opportunity to accused No.1 to

rectify the mistake and correct the revenue records.

                 5.    List   this    case   on
           13.06.2022.      On     that    date,

accused No.1 shall be present before the Court. In case the order of the writ Court is found to be in disobedience, charges would be framed against accused No.1."

3. Learned Additional Government Advocate

appearing for accused No.1 submits that in compliance of

the writ Court's order, the order dated 10.06.2022 has

been passed and necessary correction has been made in

the Revenue Records entering the name of the

complainants/petitioners, i.e., the names of the

complainants/petitioners have been restored ignoring the

Deputy Commissioner's order dated 08.12.2021. The copy

of the judgment and order dated 10.06.2022 and the

translated copy of the relevant Record of Rights and Pahani

are placed on record as Annexures-R.1 to R.7.

4. Learned counsel for the