Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40884 (KAR)

SRI GANESHAPPA v. SRI SHEKARAPPA

CCC/750/2024 · 2025-08-21

Anu Sivaraman, Rajesh Rai K

Contempt Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32911-DB CCC No. 750 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 750 OF 2024 BETWEEN: SRI. GANESHAPPA S/O. PUTTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O. KITTADAHALLI VILLAGE, SHIKARIPURA TALUK. …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. DEVENDRAPPA H., ADVOCATE -(ABSENT)) AND: 1. SRI. SHEKARAPPA, S/O. ADIVEPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT KITTADAHALLI VILLAGE, SHIKARIPURA TALUK. 2. SMT. SHANTHAMMA W/O. BHOODYAPPA, R/O. MUGALIKOPPA VILLAGE, SHIKARIPURA TALUK. 3. SMT. RENUKAMMA, W/O. GADIGEAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O. KALKOPPA VILLAGE, SORABA TALUK. Digitally signed by CHANNEGOWDA PREMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32911-DB CCC No. 750 of 2024 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER (SHO) SHIKARIPURA RURAL POLICE, SHIKARIPURA TALUK. …ACCUSED (BY SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI, AGA FOR R4) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYS TO COGNIZANCE OF THE ACT OF CONTEMPT OF COURT AND WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDERS PASSED IN R.A. No.47/2017 DATED 22.01.2024 AND 12.02.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SHIKARIPURA ON I.A.S, VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND H RESPECTIVELY AND THEREBY PUNISH THE ACCUSED No.3 TO 6/RESPONDENT No.1 TO 6, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ETC. THIS CCC, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32911-DB CCC No. 750 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K) Despite granting sufficient opportunity to comply with the office objection, the same has not been complied with. 2. Today, the matter is listed for compliance of office objection for the second time. There is no representation for the complainant, even for the second call. 3. Hence, the contempt of court case is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE RAK List No.: 3 Sl No.: 28