Karnataka High Court
M. Hemanth Kumar vs Mr. Manjunath on 4 March, 2025
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K.Somashekar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:9159-DB
CCC No. 606 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.606 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
M. HEMANTH KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
S/O. M. N. MANJE GOWDA
R/AT KUMBALUGUDU
GULLAHALLI VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
BENGALURU - 560 074.
...COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI SUDESH KUMAR ACHARYA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MR. MANJUNATH
THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANT
TO DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
Digitally signed by
MOUNESHWARAPPA BENGALURU - 560 001.
NAGARATHNA
Location: High Court
of Karnataka
2. RAMA LAKSHMANA
THE TAHASILDAR
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
BENGALURU - 560 001.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
M. S. BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...ACCUSED
(BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, A.G.A., ALONG WITH,
SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH, B. G., A.G.A., FOR A-1 TO A-3)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:9159-DB
CCC No. 606 of 2022
THIS CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS
11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, BY THE
COMPLAINANT, WHEREIN HE PRAYS TO INITIATE CONTEMPT OF
COURT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2 ALL
OTHER PERSONS CONNECTED THERETO IN THEIR OFFICE FOR
DELIBERATELY AND INTENTIONALLY VIOLATING THE ORDERS
DATED 12.04.2021 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN
W.P.NO.1318/2019 (KLR-RR/SUR) ON THE FILE OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT AT ANNEXURE-A AND TO DEAL WITH THE ACCUSED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
THIS CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR)
This contempt proceeding has been initiated by the
complainant against respondents/accused relating to the order
dated 12.04.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP
No.1318/2019 (KLR-RR/SUR) vide Annexure-A.
2. Paragraph No.4 of the aforesaid order indicates that
the writ petition is disposed off with a direction to 3rd and 4th
respondents to consider and implement the directions of the
Deputy Commissioner within an outer limit of 4 months from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
NC: 2025:KHC:9159-DB
3. Sri. Sudesh Kumar Acharya, learned counsel
appearing for the complainant is present before the Court
physically and tautly submits that even though the compliance
affidavit is filed by learned Addl. Government Advocate on
behalf of respondent-State, there is no absolute compliance of
the directions issued by the learned Single Judge.
4. The said submission is taken on record.
5. Learned Addl. Government Advocate submits the
compliance affidavit dated 05.02.2025, filed on behalf of
respondents/accused, is filed on the basis of survey report
conducted by the survey Authority. The survey report along
with the sketch of the said land as per possession of the
complainant is produced as Annexure-R1. The copy of the
mahazar dated 10.12.2024 is produced as Annexure-R2 and
the google map of the said land is also produced. The survey is
conducted in the presence of the complainant and he had also
subscribed his signature.
6. It is relevant to refer to paragraph Nos.4 and 5 of
the compliance affidavit, which reads as under:
NC: 2025:KHC:9159-DB
"4. The said survey report indicates that the
complainant is in possession of 3 acres 3 guntas of
land in S.No.40 and the same is indicated in yellow
color in Annexure-R1. Further the complainant is in
encroachment of 28 guntas of land in S.No.83 of the
same village and the same is indicated in blue color
in Annexure-R1. It is submitted that the said
S.No.83 has already been phodied in the name of
some other grantee at an earlier point of time.
5. It is submitted that the said survey has
been conducted as per the directions of the Hon'ble
Court taking into consideration the copy of the
tippani of new S.Nos:106 and 107, produced by the
complainant in the present Contempt Petition. On
verification of those documents, it is seen that the
same is not available in the Survey department.
However, as per present survey report, the said
S.No.106 is extending to the adjacent village
boundary and S.No.107 is extending to lands of
some other grantees beyond the enjoyment and
possession of the complainant. The same is marked
as ABCDEFGH in the survey report at Annexure-R1.
And the same does not match the actual possession
of the complainant."
7. The said compliance affidavit is taken on record.
8. Learned counsel for the complainant forcefully
disputes the compliance affidavit, which is made by revenue
Authority in detail.
9. Keeping in view the submission made by learned
counsel for the complainant, it is deemed appropriate to refer
to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
NC: 2025:KHC:9159-DB
S. TIRUPATHI RAO Vs. M. LINGAMAIAH AND OTHERS
reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1764, wherein, in paragraph
No.52 of the said judgment, it is revealed as under:
"52. Therefore, it would be correct to state that
the court's power when dealing with the question of
contempt, in a sense, is discretionary. It cannot be
gainsaid that even in cases where disobedience of
the order of the court is not disputed, the court may
also accept a defence, if raised, of impossibility to
comply with an order and come to the conclusion
that since it is impossible to enforce its order, action
to punish may not be initiated. That apart, refusal
may be justified by grave concerns of public policy.
Much would depend on the facts and circumstances
of the case, the nature of the contempt under
enquiry, etc., which would enable the court to
exercise its discretion either way. However, to
demonstrate his bona fide, the contemnor ought to
bring any valid defence for his disability to comply
with the court's direction to its notice without
wasting any time. Whatever be the position before
it, nothing stands in the way of the high court from
passing an order to ensure that nothing impedes the
course of justice."
10. Keeping in view the aforesaid judgment and the
compliance affidavit submitted by learned Addl. Government
Advocate, it is deemed appropriate that this contempt
proceeding is hereby dropped.
11. Learned counsel for the complainant further submits
that the liberty may be granted.
NC: 2025:KHC:9159-DB
12. Keeping in view the submission made by learned
counsel for the complainant, the liberty is granted as sought
for.
Sd/-
(K.SOMASHEKAR)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
PHM
