- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:41-DB CCC No.100216 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 6TH 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.100216 OF 2023 BETWEEN: SMT. SHAHEENA PARVEEN W/O. LATE MOHAMMAD FEROZ AHAMED, AGE. 59 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE WORK, R/O. AI ITTIHAD ROAD, AL NAHDA, GOLDEN SANDS TOWER, FLOOR 13, AP NO.1311, SHARJAH, (U.A.E.) PERMANENT R/O. HOUSE DOOR NO.162/M/1, WARD NO.25, PRASHANTH NAGAR COLONY, CANTONMENT, BALLARI-583104. R/BY HER GPA HOLDER, S. JAVEED BASHA S/O. S. MASTAN VALI, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O. HOUSE DOOR NO.162/M, WARD NO.25, PRASHANTNAGAR COLONY, CANTONMENT, BALLARI-583104. …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. T.M. NADAF, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI HEMANT, IAS AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BALLARI TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT-583101. 2. SHRI BALARAM KATTIMANI, Digitally signed by VINAYAKA B V Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:41-DB CCC No.100216 of 2023 AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, THE TAHSILDAR, BALLARI, BALLARI TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT-583101. … ACCUSED 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE, OFFICE OF AAG, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, DHARWAD-580005. …PROFORMA RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA) 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, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE CONTEMPT PETITION AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT FOR HAVING DISOBEYED THE ORDER DATED 15.11.2022, PASSED IN W.P. NO.104379/2022 (KLR-RR/SUR), PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT VIDE ANNEXURE-A, AND PASS SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. 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 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:41-DB CCC No.100216 of 2023 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) The complainant asserts ownership of 14 acres 2 cents in Sy. No.1090/1 within Ballari city limits. The complainant contends that the respondents are in deliberate violation of the writ Court’s order in W.P. No.104379/2022 which is disposed of on 15.11.2022. The writ Court’s direction in this order reads as under: “The impugned endorsement dated 08.06.2022 issued by the respondent No.2 at Annexure – Q is hereby quashed. The respondent No.2 is hereby directed to enter the name of the petitioner to the entire extent of 14 acres 2 cents in Sy. No.1090/1. However, the same is subject to the outcome of the survey to be conducted by the respondent No.2 in the light of the order dated 25.03.2021 passed in W.P. No.103568/2015 and connected petitions. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of six [6] weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. This order shall not confer any right, title over the petitioner in respect of the subject land.” - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:41-DB CCC No.100216 of 2023 2. Sri. T.M. Nadaf, the learned counsel for the complainant, is categorical that after the writ Court’s order dated 15.11.2022, a survey has indeed been completed and that after the survey the complainant has been given the benefit of revenue entries for an extent of 9 acres 98 cents as against 14 acres 2 cents. The learned counsel contends that the contempt is because the respondents have refused to enter the revenue entries for the total extent of 14 acres 2 cents notwithstanding the fact that the outcome of such survey is unsettled by this Court in Writ Appeal No.100263/2021 which is connected with two other writ appeals. 3. Sri. T.M. Nadaf argues that the effect of this Court’s order dated 20.09.2023 in these writ appeals is that there is no survey and consequentially, the respondents, to be in compliance with the writ Court’s direction, should ensure the revenue entries for the total extent of 14 acres and 2 cents and they cannot continue to limit the benefit of revenue entries to 9 acres 98 cents. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:41-DB CCC No.100216 of 2023 4. Sri Praveen K Uppar, the learned Additional Government Advocate, is heard in the light of these submissions. On perusal of this Court’s order dated 20.09.2023 in the aforesaid writ appeals, this Court must observe that this Court’s interference in the said writ appeals is in the light of the multiple claims over the land asserted by the complainant and the other lands and the suits that are pending. This Court has opined that the Civil Courts, which is seized of the suits, must appoint a Court Commissioner to conduct a fresh joint survey. With this Court’s interference in the aforesaid writ appeals, this Court cannot accept the contention that because survey is annulled the complainant must be given the benefit of the revenue entries of the total extent. 5. This Court, for the present proceedings, must observe that the direction was subject to the survey which is indeed conducted resulting in certain advantage to the complainant, but the outcome of the survey will have to be revisited in the concerned civil proceedings. Therefore, there - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:41-DB CCC No.100216 of 2023 is no reason to proceed further in the present proceedings and they stand closed accordingly. Sd/- (B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE RSH, CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 14