Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 50730 (KAR)

SRI. NARAYANAN PURUSHOTHAMAN v. SMT C VENDAMARAI

CCC/1255/2024 · 2026-02-05

Anu Sivaraman, Vijaykumar A Patil

Contempt Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6795-DB C.C.C. No.1255/2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.1255/2024 BETWEEN: SRI. NARAYANAN PURUSHOTHAMAN S/O LATE NARAYANAN AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT. ADTHIYA TRANQUIL, C-002 GROUND FLOOR, 1ST MAIN JEYAMUNI NAGAR, YELAHANKA BENGALURU-560064. …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. H. RAMACHANDRA, ADV.,) AND: 1. SMT. C. VENDAMARAI W/O LATE NARAYAN R/AT NO.21, DASAPPA GARDEN R.T.NAGAR POST, BENGALURU-560032. 2. SMT. N. POONGOTHAI D/O C. VENDAMARAI W/O SUKUMAR R/AT NO.1113/21, 11TH MAIN VYALIKAVAL, BENGALURU-560003. …ACCUSED (BY SRI. RAKESH B. BHATT, ADV., FOR A1 SRI. THUSHA NATH C.V. ADV., FOR A2) Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6795-DB C.C.C. No.1255/2024 THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO CONVICT THE ACCUSED PERSONS FOR COMMITTING THE CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS IN VIOLATING THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP NO.10288/2024 DATED 10.04.2024 STAYING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER IN MSC/CR/104/2021-22 DATED 06.03.2024 IN EXECUTING THE A GIFT DEED IN FAVOUR OF THE 2ND ACCUSED BY THE 1ST ACCUSED ON 15.04.2024, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) This contempt petition is filed alleging willful disobedience of the interim order dated 10.04.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP.No.10288/2024. 2. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that in violation of the interim order, accused No.1 has executed a gift deed dated 15.04.2024 in favour of accused No.2. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the accused submits that there is no interim order passed by the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6795-DB C.C.C. No.1255/2024 learned Single Judge restraining the parties from executing any deed of conveyance or gift deed. It is further submitted that the learned Single Judge has only stayed the order of the Assistant Commissioner, which was challenged in the proceedings. 4. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for both sides and perused the interim order. The interim order reads as under: "The matter was called out in the forenoon, there was no representation on behalf of the caveator/respondent No.1. Even in the afternoon session, there is no representation on behalf of the caveator/respondent No.1, on the ground that the respondent is not present as also the fact that the Gift Deed does not contain any condition as is necessary in law in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of SUDESH CHHIKARA VS. RAMTI DEVI AND ANOTHER reported in2022 SCC Online SC 1684. There shall be an interim order of stay as prayed for, till the next date of hearing, subject to condition that the petitioner would pay the mother Rs.10,000/- during the pendency of this petition." The interim order prayed was: "To stay the order passed by the Tribunal of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6795-DB C.C.C. No.1255/2024 Citizens and Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru North Sub-Division at Bengaluru in allowing the petition filed by the respondent No.1 No.MSC/CR/104/2021-22 on 06.03.2024, vide Annexure-G." 5. A perusal of the interim order indicates that the leaned Single Judge has stayed only the impugned order passed by the Tribunal/Assistant Commissioner dated 06.03.2024. The learned counsel for the accused are right in submitting that there is no restraining order from further gifting or alienation of the property. 6. In view of the above, we do not find any willful disobedience of the order of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the contempt proceedings are dropped. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: