Vijaykumar S/O Kannappa Mudaliar vs The State Of Karnataka
2023 Latest Caselaw 1154 Kant

                         -1-

                                       CCC No. 100185 of 2022




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                 DHARWAD BENCH

     DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023

                      PRESENT

      THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR

                        AND

      THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA

          CCC NO. 100185 OF 2022 (CIVIL)

BETWEEN:

1.   VIJAYKUMAR
     S/O. KANNAPPA MUDALIAR,
     AGE 71 YEARS,

2.   RAVIKUMAR
     S/O. KANNAPPA MUDALIAR,
     AGE 69 YEARS,

     REPRESENTED BY GPA HODER
     I.E., COMPLAINANT - 1
     VIJAYKUMAR S/O. KANNAPPA MUDALIAR,

     RESIDENTS OF NO 138,
     III MAIN ROAD, PARVATHI NAGAR,
     BALLARI-583 103,
     PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.15,
     6TH BLOCK, MADHUVANA LAYOUT,
     SREERAMAPURA, 2ND STAGE,
     MYSORE-570 023.
                                      ... COMPLAINANTS

(BY SRI. HARSH DESAI, ADVOCATE)
                         -2-

                                     CCC No. 100185 of 2022




AND:

1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
     BY ITS SECRETARY TO
     THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
     M.S. BUILDING,
     BENGALURU-560 001.

2.   THE TAHSILDAR,
     BALLARI TALUK,
     BALLARI-583 101.
     (NAME H. VISHWANATHA)
                                    ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. K. VIDYAVATI, AAG FOR
 SRI. PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, HCGP FOR PROFORMA R1 & A2)


     THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 & 12 OF
THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, R/W. ARTICLE
215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950, PRAYING THIS
HON'BLE COURT TO INITIATE CONTEMPT OF COURT
PROCEEDINGS   AGAINST   THE ACCUSED HEREIN FOR
DISREGARDING AND VIOLATING THE ORDER/DIRECTION
ISSUED IN WP NO.109639 OF 2017 DATED 20.04.2021
AND METE OUT PUNISHMENT UNDER THE CONTEMPT OF
COURT ACT, 1971, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.


     THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
K.SOMASHEKAR, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                             -3-

                                            CCC No. 100185 of 2022




                         ORDER

1. Heard the learned counsel Shri Harsh Desai

for the complainants and the learned AAG namely

Smt. K.Vidyavati representing the learned HCGP for the

accused Nos.1 & 2, who are present before the Court

physically.

2. This contempt proceeding is filed by the

complainant for implementation of the order dated

20.04.2021, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.

No.109639/2017, wherein the learned Single Judge

observed that the plaintiff has instituted a suit in O.S.

No.110/64 before the jurisdictional Civil Court and held

that the ancestors of the petitioner have no right, title or

interest over the land in question. The same finds place

in paragraph No.4 of the order passed by the learned

Single Judge. In paragraph No.10, the learned Single

Judge has held that the total extent of land bearing Sy.

No.597B measuring 14 acres 84 cents and out of which

CCC No. 100185 of 2022

4 acres 18 cents was acquired by the State and the

compensation was paid to the petitioner No.1 which is

evident from Annexure-P to the writ petition. The

remaining 2 acres of land was mutated in favour of the

father of the petitioner Nos.2 & 3 herein on 05.05.2006.

3. Learned counsel for the complainants submits

that along with this contempt proceeding, the State has

also preferred an appeal in W.A. No.100535/2022,

wherein applications i.e., I.A.No.2/2022 for condonation

of delay of 245 days in filing the appeal and I.A.

No.3/2022 for stay are pending adjudication.

4. Learned counsel for the complainants placed

reliance on the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of Dr. H. Phunindre Singh

and others Vs. K.K. Sethi and another reported

(1998)8 SCC 640, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court

while dealing with the scope of Sections 2(a) and 12 of

the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 held "particularly

CCC No. 100185 of 2022

when the order passed by the learned Single Judge of

the High Court was not stayed by the Division Bench,

the contempt petition should have been disposed of on

merits instead of adjourning the same till disposal of the

appeal, so that question of deliberate violation of the

subsisting order of the Court is considered and

enforceability of the Court's order is not permitted to be

diluted."

5. Keeping in view the scope of Sections 11 & 12

of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, it is deemed

appropriate that the affidavit filed by the learned AAG is

placed on record. Consequently, this contempt

proceeding does not survive for consideration for the

present since the appeal is pending which is filed

challenging the order passed by the learned Single

Judge. Accordingly, this contempt proceeding is hereby

disposed off.

CCC No. 100185 of 2022

However, keeping in view the submission made by

the learned counsel for the complainants/petitioners the

contentions taken in this contempt proceeding shall be

kept open. Accordingly, made an observation.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE Vnp*