Karnataka High Court
Mr. A.S. Kashi Vishwanatha Alias A S ... vs Sri. Tushar Girinath on 28 March, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:13189-DB
CCC No. 209 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 209 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
1. MR. A.S. KASHI VISHWANATHA @
A. S. KASHI VISWANTHA SETTY,
S/O A. M. SURYANARAYANA SETTY,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
R/AT DOOR No.35,
SRINIVASA NILAYAM,
MAHANTHA LAYOUT,
BULL TEMPLE ROAD CROSS,
BENGALURU-560019.
...COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI LAKAMAPURMATH CHIDANANDAYYA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed 1. SRI. TUSHAR GIRINATH,
by VALLI
MARIMUTHU CHIEF COMMISSIONER,
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF N. R. SQUARE,
KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560002.
2. SMT. VEENA,
JOINT DIRECTOR,
(TOWN PLANNING) (SOUTH),
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
BBMP, COMMERCIAL COMPLEX,
9TH CROSS, 9TH MAIN ROAD,
II BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560011.
3. SRI NACHIKETH,
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:13189-DB
CCC No. 209 of 2025
(TOWN PLANNING) (SOUTH),
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
BBMP, COMMERCIAL COMPLEX,
9TH CROSS, 9TH MAIN ROAD,
II BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560011.
...ACCUSED
(BY SMT. RAMYA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. KARTHIKEYAN B. S., ADVOCATE)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, BY THE COMPLAINANT PRAYING TO
SUMMON AND PROSECUTE AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR THEIR
DELIBERATE AND WILFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED
21.06.2024, VIDE ANNEXURE-A, PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP No.14271/2024.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
N. V. ANJARIA
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)
In respect of the directions contained in paragraph 4 of
the order dated 21.06.2024 passed by learned Single Judge,
which are the subject matter of the alleged non-compliance, it
was submitted by learned advocate Mr. Lakamapurmath
Chidanandayya for the complainant that the complainant-has
produced the relevant documents as observed by learned
Single Judge, however, the respondents have not so far
proceeded to sanction the plan in accordance with law.
NC: 2025:KHC:13189-DB
2. It is to be noticed from the directions that no time limit
was prescribed by learned Single Judge for the respondents to
proceed about sanctioning of the plan in accordance with law.
The complainant has not communicated to the respondents
setting out the time limit for compliance.
3. In that view, it is not possible to conclude at this stage
that any contempt much less willful contempt is committed by
the respondents.
4. In the circumstances, while this contempt petition is not
entertained, it is observed that the competent authority of the
respondents shall proceed to comply with the directions of
learned Single Judge to sanction the plan, as may be
mandatory in law, provided that the complainant has complied
with all the requirements, within fourteen weeks from today.
5. The petition is disposed off accordingly.
Sd/-
(N. V. ANJARIA)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
(K. V. ARAVIND)
JUDGE
