- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15526-DB CCC No. 260 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND CCC NO. 260 OF 2025 (CIVIL) BETWEEN: 1. RAMKY ONE NORTH APARTMENT OWNERS COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT MR. VIDYADHAR DURGEKAR HAVING ITS OFFICE AT: RAMKY ONE NORTH, DODBALLAPUR ROAD YELAHANKA BENGALURU - 560 064 …COMPLAINANT (BY SMT. DURGEKAR SUJATHA VIDYADHAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. A.V. BHASKAR REDDY AUTHORISED SIGNATORY RAMKY ESTATES AND FARMS LTD HAVING OFFICE AT: No.25-30, RAMKY HOUSE, 2ND CROSS RAGHAVENDRA NAGAR KALYAN NAGAR POST BENGALURU - 560 043 …ACCUSED Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15526-DB CCC No. 260 of 2025 THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 2(b)11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971 R/W ARTICLE 215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT AGAINST THE ALLEGED ACCUSED FOR INTERFERENCE IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE, AND THE WILLFUL AND FLAGRANT DISOBEDIENCE OF ORDERS IN W.P. NO.25997/2023 DATED 22ND JANUARY 2024 AND W.A. No.190/2024 DATED 23RD SEPTEMBER 2024 AND TO PUNISH THEM WITH MAXIMUM PENALTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED 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) Learned Single Judge by his order dated 22.01.2024 disposed of the petition with following observations extracted hereinbelow which are paragraphs 13 to 17, "13. Considering the facts of the present case, this Court is of the view that no case is made out to hear the Writ Petition on merits where the petitioners' claim to quash the notification dated 07.11.2023 issued under Form No.XII. 14. Accordingly, the Writ petition is dismissed. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15526-DB CCC No. 260 of 2025 15. Respondent No.5 shall issue fresh calendar of events to hold elections to the Board of 6th respondent-Society. 16. Notwithstanding the dismissal of the Writ Petition, in case the petitioners are able to establish that their applications have been rejected or not accepted by the authority, the petitioners are at liberty to avail such statutory remedy before the Appellate Authority. If such an appeal is filed, the same shall be decided in accordance with law without being influenced by the observations made in this Writ Petition. 17. This Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the claim made by the petitioners to be the members of the 6th respondent Society. This Court has only examined whether the notification dated 07.11.2023 is to be quashed at this stage or not." 2. The aforesaid order was taken in Writ Appeal No.190 of 2024 which was not entertained as having become infructuous as per order dated 23.09.2024. 3. The said order reads as under, "Learned advocate Mr. Rahul Dev. S. Deshamudre appearing online for the appellants stated that the elections have already taken place and therefore the substratum of the writ appeal has become infructuous. 2. Learned Additional Government Advocate Smt. Niloufer Akbar for respondent Nos.1 to 3 has no objection in disposing of the writ appeal on the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15526-DB CCC No. 260 of 2025 above ground. She confirms that the elections are held and the Board has become functional. 3. In view of the above statements, appeal will not survive. Accordingly, writ appeal is disposed of as infructuous. In view of disposal of the appeal, pending interlocutory application would not survive and it is disposed of accordingly." 4. The present contempt petition is filed in respect of alleged non-compliance of the above orders. 5. From either of the above orders, whether of learned Single Judge or of the Division Bench in the writ appeal, learned advocate Smt. Durgekar Sujatha Vidyadhar for the complainant was unable to point out any positive direction for non-compliance of which the contempt could be alleged. In absence of any positive direction, the contempt petition is not liable to be entertained. For exercising the contempt power, there has to be positive direction required to be complied with by the respondents. 6. It may be noticed that in the order of the Division Bench, it is unequivocally stated, "the elections are held and the Board has become functional". The above statement of law already stands in - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15526-DB CCC No. 260 of 2025 the order to operate to its logical end. However, no case is made out to exercise the contempt jurisdiction. 7. The petition is accordingly not entertained and stands dismissed. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE AHB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5