- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1397-DB CCC No. 634 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 634 OF 2022 BETWEEN: M/S PURAVANKARA PROJECTS LIMITED (NOW KNOWN AS M/S PRUVANKARA LTD) A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMAPNES ACT 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 130/1, ULSOOR ROAD BANGALORE 560043 REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT LEGAL MRS S JOHN VIJAYKUMAR …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. JOSEPH ANTHONY - ADVOCATE) AND: M/S PURVA METALS SECTION PRIVATE LIMITED NO 193, “SHIV SADAN” 4TH FLOOR, OPP. TO NCC APARTMENT NEAR ROYAL ENFILED SHOWROOOM B NARAYANAPURA BENGALURU - 560016 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MR. LALIT KUMAR PURVA. …ACCUSED (BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR L - ADVOCATE) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS, 1971 AND RULE 3 OF TH HIGH COURT Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1397-DB CCC No. 634 of 2022 OF KARNATAKA (CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS) RULES 1981 BY THE COMPLAINANT, PRAYING TO ORDER THAT THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF CONTEMPT OF ORDER DATED MAY 27, 2022 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN MFA NO.4313/2018 (PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A). THIS CCC, 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 proceedings is initiated by the complainant against the respondent/accused for having deliberate and willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in MFA.No.4313/2018 (IPR) dated 27.05.2022 vide Annexure – A. 2. Learned counsel Sri Joseph Anthony for complainant is present. Learned counsel Sri Vijaya Kumar.L is present and submits that learned counsel Sri Harikrishna.S.Holla who is on record for - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1397-DB CCC No. 634 of 2022 respondent/accused is no more. He further submits that he has subscribed his signature on vakalath for respondent/accused and a memo has been filed to that effect. The memo is taken on record. 3. The aforesaid appeal has been filed under Order 43 Rule 1(r) R/w Section 151 of CPC, against the order dated 27.04.2018 passed on IA.Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.4974/2017 on the file of the XVIII Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru. IA.No.1 filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC was dismissed and IA.No.2 filed under Order 39 Rule 4 r/w Section 151 of CPC was allowed. 4. Learned counsels for the parties submit that proceeding in O.S.No.4974/2017 was filed by plaintiff against the defendant for permanent injunction. The Trial Court rendered judgment and decree in the aforesaid original suit on 15.11.2022. subsequent to rendering of the said judgment and decree, appeal has been preferred in RFA.No.2116/2022 which is pending before the Court - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:1397-DB CCC No. 634 of 2022 having jurisdiction to deal the matter and interim order has also been granted on 02.02.2023. 5. However, it is relevant to refer the order rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CCC.No.1237/2022 (Civil) dated 26.03.2023 wherein para No.3 indicates as under: ‘3. When the order is an interim order, by its very nature it does not determine rights of the parties finally. There are no trappings of finality in the order. In the aforesaid view, this Court is not inclined to entertain the contempt petition and it is not persuaded to exercise the power of contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.’ 6. It is relevant to refer the order rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CCC.No.703/2024 (Civil) dated 06.08.2024 wherein Para No. 2 indicates as under: ‘2. This Court is not inclined to invoke and exercise the jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, in view that the petitioner has the remedy to approach the same Court for breach of injunction under the provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908.’ - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:1397-DB CCC No. 634 of 2022 7. Keeping in view the aforesaid orders and the appeal which is pending for consideration, this contempt proceeding does not survive for consideration to take punitive action against the Respondent/Accused. Consequently, this contempt proceeding is hereby dropped. In the meanwhile, learned counsel for the complainant seeks liberty. Therefore, liberty is granted to the complainant to proceed further in accordance with law. SD/- (K.SOMASHEKAR) JUDGE SD/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE RJ