- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24919-DB CCC No.992/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION No. 992 OF 2022 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. DEVARAJAMMA, W/O K. VENKATASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 2. K. V. PUSHPALATHA, D/O K. VENKATASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, 3. K. V. VARADARAJU, S/O K. VENKATASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 4. K. V. NALINI, D/O K. VENKATASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 5. K. V. MANJUNATH, S/O K. VENKATSHETTY, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDENT OF NEW KIKERI ROAD, BASAWESHWARANAGAR, K.R. PET TOWN, K.R. PET, MANDYA DISTRICT-571426. …COMPLAINANTS (BY SRI. SATHYA D., ADVOCATE FOR SRI K.V. NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by K S RENUKAMBA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24919-DB CCC No.992/2022 AND: 1. SMT. ROOPA, THE TAHSILDHAR, K.R. PETE TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571426. …ACCUSED NO.1 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. …PROFORMA RESPONDENT (BY SMT. MAMATHA SHETTY, AGA FOR ACCUSED NO.1 AND PROFORMA RESPONDENT) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 R/W ARTICLE 215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR HAVING COMMITTED THE CONTEMPT OF THE COURT ORDER DATED 29.6.2022 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP No.12612/2022 (KLR-RES) AT ANNEXURE-D. THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL and HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL) This complaint is filed alleging willful disobedience of the order of learned Single Judge dated 29.06.2022 in W.P.No.12612/2022 (KLR-RES). By the said order, respondent No.1 herein was directed to consider the claim of the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24919-DB CCC No.992/2022 petitioners to mutate their names in the revenue records in respect of certain properties within a period of three months. 2. The successor in the office of respondent No.1 has filed affidavit along with RTC and Mutation Register Extract to show that considering the applications of the complainants, complainants’ names are entered in the RTC of concerned lands. The delay in doing the needful is explained. 3. Learned counsel for the complainants also admits the compliance. Therefore, accepting the compliance, proceedings are dropped. Sd/- (K.S.MUDAGAL) JUDGE Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE MV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13