Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 56916 (KAR)

N. HAZRATH REDDY v. SRI. SANDEEP RAJU

CCC/114/2024 · 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:32906-DB CCC No. 114 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. 114 OF 2024 BETWEEN: N. HAZRATH REDDY S/O DASHARATH RAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/A No.15, A. NARAYANAPURA DOORAVANINAGAR POST, BANGALORE - 560 016 …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. VIRUPAKSHAIAH P.H., ADVOCATE - (ABSENT)) AND: 1. SRI. SANDEEP RAJU, S/O GOPAL RAJU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, DIRECTOR, HOTEL KANISHKA, No.2, 2ND MAIN ROAD, GANDHINAGARA, BANGALORE - 560 009 R/A No.104/1, OPP. TULIP HOTEL, R.V. LAYOUT, OFF SANKEY ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU - 560 020. 2. SRI. GOPAL RAJU, S/O KUPPA RAJU, Digitally signed by CHANNEGOWDA PREMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32906-DB CCC No. 114 of 2024 AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, HOTEL KANISHKA, No.2, 2ND MAIN ROAD, GANDHINAGARA BANGALORE - 560 009. …ACCUSED THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYS TO TAKE NECESSARY ACTION AGAINST THE ACCUSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, SINCE THEY HAVE FAILED TO OBEY AND IMPLEMENT THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 04.12.2023 IN I.A.No.1/2023 IN W.P.No.51420/2019 (L-RES) VIDE ANNEXURE-C FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT. 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 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. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32906-DB CCC No. 114 of 2024 2. Today, the matter is listed for compliance of office objection for the third 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.: 19