Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17308 (KAR)

SMT.MANJAMMA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CCC/673/2025 · 2026-02-23

C M Poonacha

Contempt Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11182-DB CCC No. 673 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 673 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. MANJAMMA W/O. LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 2. SAMPATH KUMAR V S/O. LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 3. ARUNA D/O. LATE VENKATARAAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 4. PAVITHRA D/O. LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS 5. ASHA D/O. LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT SONNAPPANAHALLI KASABA (H), MALUR (T) KOLAR-563103. …COMPLAINANTS (BY SRI. VENKATA REDDY C M., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by VEERENDRA KUMAR K M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11182-DB CCC No. 673 of 2025 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPTD. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 …PRO FORMA RESPONDENT 2. SMT. ROOPA M V. THE TAHASILDAR MALUR TALUK MALUR - 563 103 …ACCUSED (BY SRI S.H. RAGHAVENDRA, AGA) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO SUMMON THE ACCUSED AND TO DEAL WITH THEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW FOR DISOBEDIENCE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT ORDER/DIRECTION DATED 29.01.2025 PASSED IN WP NO.19553/2024 (KLR-RR/SUR). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The complainant has filed the present complaint alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 29.01.2025 passed by the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11182-DB CCC No. 673 of 2025 learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.19553/2024 (KLR- RR/SUR). 2. An affidavit of compliance has been filed which indicates that the order has been substantially complied with. 3. It is also stated that the entries would be made in the RTC records within a period of two weeks after receipt of the formal approval. 4. In view of the above, the present complaint is closed with a liberty to the complainant to revive the same, if the RTC records are not altered. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE KMV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35