LOKAPPA S/O KALLAPPA KOTABAGI v. KALLAPPA S/O BASAPPA NAIKAR
CCC/100163/2024 · 2025-01-22
B M Shyam Prasad, Ramachandra D Huddar
Contempt Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5668 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5668 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1181-DB CCC No. 100163 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.100163 OF 2024 BETWEEN:
LOKAPPA S/O KALLAPPA KOTABAGI, AGE. 85 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. KYARAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD. - COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. G.I. GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
KALLAPPA S/O BASAPPA NAIKAR AGE. 29 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O KYATAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD-580001.
2.
VITTAL S/O BASAPPA NAIKAR AGE. 27 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O KYARAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD-580001. - ACCUSED (BY SRI. PRAVEEN P. TARIKAR, ADVOCATE FOR A1 & A2)
THIS CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, R/W. ARTICLE 215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950, FOR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER/ UNDERTAKING DATED 25.04.2024 MADE IN WRIT PETITION NO.102512/2024 PASSED VIDE ANNEXURE-A & ETC.,
THIS CONTEMPT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1181-DB CCC No. 100163 of 2024
ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD)
Sri Praveen P. Tarikar, the learned counsel for the respondent, is permitted to file a Compliance Report.
The complainant contends that the respondents have deliberately violated the undertaking given to the Writ Court in W.P. No. 102512/2024. The respondent’s undertaking is to complete construction of common wall within a certain timeframe. There is undeniably a delay in completion of the construction, but the respondents, who have now completed construction of the common wall in all respects, seek a lenient view tendering unconditional apology for the delay.
In the light of the afore, the complaint stands dropped accepting the apology.
Sd/- (B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE
Sd/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE BVV/LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 16