Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 31493 (KAR)

SHIVAMALLAPPA v. SMT SHILPA NAG

CCC/861/2024 · 2025-04-03

K V Aravind, N V Anjaria Cj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14297-DB CCC No. 861 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD 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. 861 OF 2024 (CIVIL) BETWEEN: 1. SHIVAMALLAPPA S/O MAHADEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 2. PARAMASHIVAPPA S/O LATE GURUMALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 3. MALLARAJU S/O LATE RANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 4. PUTTASWAMY S/O LATE KAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 5. NAGARAJU B S/O LATE BASAVAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 6. LAKSHMI NARASIMHAMURTHY S/O LATE SANJEEVAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 7. MAHADEVAIAH S/O LATE KOTE BASAVAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS Digitally signed by PRABHAKAR SWETHA KRISHNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14297-DB CCC No. 861 of 2024 8. MAHESH S/O LATE BASAVARAJU AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 9. N BANGARU S/O NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 10. VISHAKANTH S/O GURUNANJAIAH SHETTY AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 11. N MAHADEVAIAH S/O NANJAIAH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 12. R MAHADEVASWAMY S/O RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS 13. GURUSIDDASHETTY S/O KALASHETTY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 14. RAJAPPA S/O GURUSIDDAIAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS 15. BYRAVA S/O CHUNCHA MADEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 16. R NAGANNA S/O LATE RACHAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS ALL ARE WORKING AS WATERMEN/PUMP OPERATORS - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14297-DB CCC No. 861 of 2024 CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL CHAMARAJANAGARA CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT-571 312 …COMPLAINANTS (BY SRI K R SATHISH, ADVOCATE-ABSENT) AND: 1. SMT SHILPA NAG DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHAMARAJANAGARA CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT-571 312 2. SRI S V RAMADAS COMMISSIONER CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL CHAMARAJANAGAR CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT-571 312 …ACCUSED 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT V.V. TOWERS DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560 001 BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ...PRO FORMA RESPONDENT (BY SRI NAVEEN CHANDRASHEKAR, AGA FOR R-1 & 3) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF WILLFUL DEFAULT/WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS COURT IN WRIT PETITION NO.5539/2023 DATED 11.04.2023 (S-RES) AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14297-DB CCC No. 861 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, 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) This court had an occasion to pass the following order on 25.03.2025, "This contempt petition seeks to allege non- compliance and therefore, contempt of court of the order dated 11.04.2023. The contempt petition was filed on 12.08.2024. Prima facie, the maintainability of the petition comes within the sweep of Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. In any view since learned Additional Government Advocate had stated, on the last occasion, that the representation of the petitioners was considered by the authorities, the petition was posted today. Today, affidavit of the Deputy Commissioner is filed along with which endorsement/order dated 22.10.2024 is produced. The representation of the petitioners is not accepted. The petition becomes liable to be disposed of - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14297-DB CCC No. 861 of 2024 as not surviving. However, learned advocate for the complainants is not present. In order to give learned advocate an opportunity to appear, stand over to 26.03.2025, to be listed at 2.30 p.m." 2. Today also, none is present for the complainants. 3. Learned Additional Government Advocate Mr. Naveen Chandrashekar would submit that the endorsement since issued on 22.10.2024, the representation of the complainants is decided and the same is rejected. 4. Undoubtedly, the aforesaid endorsement marks compliance of the directions of learned Single Judge. Therefore, nothing survives in the present contempt petition. 5. The contempt petition is accordingly disposed of as not surviving. In case of genuine difficulty, the complainants are permitted to seek revival of the contempt petition by filing a note before the Registry as that the counsel for the complainants is not present. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:14297-DB CCC No. 861 of 2024 In view of disposal of the petition, any interlocutory application that may be pending would not survive and stands accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE KPS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 116