- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1693-DB CCC No.100270 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 29TH 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.100270 OF 2024 BETWEEN: SRI. PARASHURAM S/O HANAMANTHSA ATHANI AGE. 73 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. 394/1, KESHWAPUR ROAD, NEAR WOODLAND HOTEL, JADHAV CHAWL, TORAL APARTMENT OPP., KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580023. …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. DINESH M. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) AND: ISHWAR ULLAGADDI COMMISSIONER, THE HUBBALLI-DHARWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, LAMINGTON ROAD, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580020. …ACCUSED (BY SRI. GURUDEV I. GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE) 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, PRAYING TO, PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR VIOLATING THE DATED 20/03/2023 PASSED IN W.P.NO.101433/2023 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:1693-DB CCC No.100270 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) The complainant has filed his writ petition in W.P. No.101433/2023 for directions to the Hubballi Dharwad Municipal Corporation to consider his representation, and the complainant’s representation is for payment of compensation on the ground that a certain portion of his land measuring 9 guntas in R.S. No.6/6B/4 of Unkal Village is used for construction of a road. The writ Court has called upon the Assistant Director of Land Records, Hubballi to prepare a fresh sketch indicating the location of the portion identified by the complainant as road and directing the first respondent to initiate acquisition proceedings if any portion of the complainant’s property is indeed used as road. The writ Court’s direction is in the light of its observation in paragraph Nos.7 and 8. 2. Sri. Dinesh M. Kulkarni, the learned counsel for the complainant, submits that after the writ Court’s order, the Assistant Director of Land Records, Hubballi has filed a report [Annexure – C] establishing that a portion of the complainant’s property which is diverted from non-agricultural purposes under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 is indeed used as a road. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1693-DB CCC No.100270 of 2024 The respondent – Commissioner, Hubballi Dharwad Municipal Corporation has filed an affidavit stating as follows amongst others. “It is submitted that the undersigned submits that the land bearing R.S. No. 6/6B measures 1 Acre 2 Guntas was converted into non-agricultural purpose by order of the Deputy Commissioner dated 16-11-1992. Thereafter this R.S. No. 6/6B has been further divided into several parts and the petitioner claims that he is the owner of the land bearing R.S. No. 6/6B/4 measuring 9 Guntas. The Corporation is not in need of the said road. Hence the Corporation does not claim any right over the land in question and does not intend to acquire it. Accordingly the Affidavit was filed. This Hon'ble court by its order dated 6-1-2025 was pleased to direct the undersigned to consider and ensure that a proper sketch of the subject property is filed with the details of the measurement and the access to the adjacent properties. In owed compliance of the directions issued by this Hon'ble court, the undersigned is herewith furnishing this report. The land bearing R.S. No. 6/6B/4 measuring 9 Guntas belongs to the complainant. Based on the site inspection report submitted by Zonal Commissioner and Engineers, this land is surrounded by R.S. No. 6/6B/5 and R.S. No. 6/6B/3 to the East and west and to the North the Layout approved by HDUDA known as Muneshwara Nagar bearing CTS No. 3505A is located and to the South HDUDA approved Raghavendra colony bearing CTS NO. 3505B is located. Since it is surrounded by approved - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1693-DB CCC No.100270 of 2024 layout the ingress and egress to the property of the complainant is provided and there is also access to the other private properties. There are no UGD or other civic utilities in the land bearing R.S. No. 6/6B/4 which is belonging to the complainant. The sketch reflecting the location of the property is herewith produced for kind perusal of this Hon'ble court. Hence this Report.” 3. This Court in the light of the afore, has called upon the first respondent to ensure that a proper sketch is prepared. The details of the measurement and access to the adjacent property, and in compliance with such direction, a sketch is produced which reads as under: - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1693-DB CCC No.100270 of 2024 4. Sri. G.I. Gachhinamath, the learned counsel for the respondent, relying upon the contents of the counter affidavit, the enclosed photographs and the sketch now filed reiterates the respondent’s case [a] that no road is constructed in the complainant’s property, [b] that there is no under ground drainage running in his property, [c] that if any electrical pole is constructed, it is only because of the complainant has permitted, [d] that the Corporation does not require any portion of the complainant’s property for a road and [e] that the adjacent owners as seen in the sketch have access independent of any access through the complainant’s land. In fact, Sri. In fact, Sri. G.I. Gachhinamath submits that this Court can dispose of the complaint in the light of the above and taking on record the Corporation’s stand that the complainant will be at liberty to construct compound without any road running through his property. In rejoinder, Sri. Dinesh M. Kulkarni submits that it is possible that the owners of the neighboring property may object if there is any construction. 5. These circumstances are considered within the expanse of this Court’s jurisdiction in the present proceedings, - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1693-DB CCC No.100270 of 2024 and this Court is persuaded to opine that no case of deliberate disobedience is established but the complainant must be entitled to take every advantage that should inure because of the stand taken before this Court including the right to construct compound and seek shifting of any pole that could be in his property. In the light of the afore, the complaint stands disposed of subject to observations as aforesaid. Sd/- (B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE RSH, CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 16