Karnataka High Court
Smt. Shivamma vs Sri. Dinesh Kumar on 16 April, 2025
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K.Somashekar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB
CCC No. 626 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 626 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SHIVAMMA
W/O. LATE M. A. NARASARAJU
AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS
2. SMT. M. N. SHOBHA
W/O. D. SAMPATH KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
3. SRI. RAJASHEKAR
Digitally signed S/O. LATE M. A. NARASARAJU
by SUMATHY
KANNAN AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 4. SRI. PRADEEP KUMAR
KARNATAKA
S/O. LATE M. A. NARASARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO. 1130/9
1ST CROSS, DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR ROAD
CHAMARAJAPURAM, MYSORE-570 009
REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER
SRI. N. MANJUNATH
S/O. LATE NAGARAJA RAO
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
NO. 252, 4TH CROSS, 7TH MAIN
4TH PHASE, DOLLARS COLONY
J.P. NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 078.
...COMPLAINANTS
(BY SRI. S S NAGANAND - SR. COUNSEL ADVOCATE FOR SRI
SRI. SANJEEV B L - ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB
CCC No. 626 of 2023
AND:
1 SRI. DINESH KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
COMMISSIONER
MYSURU URBAN DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY (MUDA)
JHANSI RANI LAXMIBAI ROAD
MYSURU.
1(A) SRI. A N RAGHUNANDAN
COMMISSIONER
MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
JANSHI RANI LAXMIBAI ROAD
MYSURU.
...ACCUSED
(BY SRI. GANESH GOWDA - ADVOCATE FOR SRI GANAPATHY
BHAT VAJRALLI - ADVOCATE FOR ACCUSED; SRI. M B
NARAGUND - SR. COUNSEL, SRI. T P VIVEKANANDA -
ADVOCATE FOR ACCUSED NO.1(A))
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR WILLFUL
DISOBEDIENCE TO THE ORDER DATED 15.12.2022 PASSED BY
THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP NO.25130/2022 (LA-RES) (VIDE
ANNEXURE-A) AND PUNISH THEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
THIS CCC, COMING ON FOR, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS
MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
AND
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB
CCC No. 626 of 2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR) This contempt petition has been initiated by complainants - Smt.Shivamma and others against the accused for willful disobedience to the order dated 15.12.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP.Nos.25130/2022 (LA-RES) vide Annexure-A.
2. Learned Senior counsel Sri S.S.Naganand represents learned counsel Sri Sanjeev B.L who is on record for complainants. Learned Senior counsel Sri M.B.Naragund appears for learned counsel Sri T.P.Vivekananda who is on record for accused No.1(a). Learned counsel Sri Ganesh Gowda represents learned counsel Sri Ganapati Bhat Vajralli who is on record for accused No.1.
3. Paragraph No.3 of the learned Single Judge's order states that it is the grievance of the petitioners that their representation dated 28.10.2022 at Annexure-F submitted -4- NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023 to the respondent Authority has not been considered so far by the respondents nor any order has been passed on the same. Under these circumstances, the petitioners are before the Court by way of the present petition. Thereafter in Para No.5 the learned Single Judge has directed the respondent Authority to address the grievances of the petitioners and consider their representation dated 28.10.2022 at Annexure-F and pass the appropriate order in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks.
4. Learned counsel seeks for consideration of the compliance affidavit dated 05.03.2025 filed by the accused No.1-Sri.Dinesh Kumar, Ex-Commissioner, MUDA.
5. Learned Senior counsel Sri M.B.Naragund for accused No.1(a)-Sri.A.N.Raghunandan, Commissioner, MUDA submits that the said accused No.1(a) has also filed compliance affidavit dated 01.04.2025 with documents at Sl.No.2 to 32. At paragraph No.3 of the said affidavit it -5- NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023 is stated that on the previous date of hearing i.e., on 20.03.2025, taking note of the submission made on behalf of the complainants that possession of the site bearing Nos.118/2, 118/3, 89, 105, 108 and 109 are yet to be delivered. He also submits that possession of sites stated supra shall be delivered after verification of concerned documents. Even after last date of hearing, present Commissioner of MUDA had verified the documents concerning the aforementioned sites. The details of the said verification are as follows:
i) The record discloses that site No.118/2 was allotted in terms of the letter of allotment dated 08.02.2023. The absolute sale deed has been executed on 19.04.2023 in favour of the GPA Holder of the complainants directly with the following covenant regarding possession:
On 07.06.2023, the GPA Holder of the complainants executed a Deed of Settlement in favour of Sri Naveen Bose conveying the aforesaid site with the following covenant:-6-
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023 "Ever since the said date, the Settle is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule property without any let or hindrance from anyone, by getting the Katha of the said property registered in the revenue records of the MUDA and has paid the assessment in respect of the above mentioned property to the MUDA."
The GPA Holder of the complainants executed a Rectification Deed on 18.03.2024 substituting the paragraph concerning the financial adjustment between the Settlor and the Setlee. Neither in the sale deed executed by the MUDA nor in the Settlement Deed and the Rectification Deed, there is a mention about the obligation of MUDA to deliver possession of the aforementioned site at a later date. Thus, it is clear that the GPA holder of the complainants has obtained the registered sale deed and transferred the aforementioned site in favour of Mr.Naveen Bhose through a Settlement Deed followed by Deed of Rectification. Copies of the Letter of allotment, sale deed dated 19.04.2023, Katha Certificate dated 24.02.2023, Settlement deed dated 07.06.2023 and encumbrance -7- NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023 certificates are produced herewith and marked as Annexures-R1, R1(a) to (e).
ii) As regards the site No.118/3 is concerned, the copies of the documents obtained from the office of the Sub-Registrar discloses that the site in question has been allotted on 08.02.2023 at the value of Rs.3,000/- followed by execution of the absolute sale deed dated 19.04.2023 with the following covenant regarding the possession:
The covenant in the sale deed discloses the registration of katha on 24.04.2023. The GPA Holder of the complainants sold the site in question in favour of Sri.Rakshit S through registered sale deed dated 18.07.2023 for a consideration of Rs.1,10,00,000/- with the following covenants regarding the possession:
"Ever since the said date of purchase the Vendor is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the above mentioned property without any let or hindrance from anyone, by getting the Katha of the schedule property transferred to his name on the revenue records of the MUDA and has -8- NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023 been paying the taxes in respect of the schedule property to the MUDA."
iii) Site No.89 measuring 15x24 mtrs. Has been allotted on 13.05.2024. Absolute sale deed has been executed on 13.04.2024 with the following covenant regarding possession:
Based on the sale deed, Katha has been registered in the name of the GPA Holder of the complainants on 25.03.2024. Copies of the Letter of allotment, sale deed dated 13.05.2024, Katha certificate dated 23.05.2024 and encumbrance certificates are produced herewith and marked as Annexures - R3, R3(a) to (c).
(iv) Site No.105 measuring 15x24 mtrs.
Has been allotted on 13.05.2024. Absolute sale deed has been executed on 13.05.2024/14.5.2024, with the following covenant regarding possession:
Based on the sale deed, Katha has been registered in the name of the GPA Holder of the complainants on 23.05.2024.-9-
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023 The record discloses that the GPA Holder of the complainants has executed a registered Gift Deed dated 21.05.2024 in favour of Smt.Laxmi Vinay who happens to the sister-in-law of the GPA Holder. Copies of the Letter of allotment, sale deed dated 13.05.2024, Katha Certificate dated 23.05.2024, Gift deed dated 21.05.2024, Katha certificate dated 19.06.2024 and encumbrance certificates are produced herewith and marked as Annexures-R4, R4(a) to (e).
v) Site No.108 measuring 15x24 mtrs. has been allotted on 13.05.2024. Absolute sale deed has been executed on 13.05.2024 with the following covenant regarding possession:
The records further disclose that the Katha of the property has been registered in the name of the GPA Holder of the complainants on 25.03.2024. As per Encumbrance Certificate, the site in question is not further encumbered after 13.05.2024. Copies of the Letter of allotment, sale deed dated 13.05.2024, Katha Certificate dated 23.05.2024 and encumbrance certificates are produced herewith and marked as Annexures-R5, R5(a) to (c).
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023
vi) Site No.109 measuring 15x24 mtrs. has been allotted on 13.05.2024. Absolute sale deed has been executed on 13.05.2024 with the following covenant regarding possession:
Based on the sale deed, Katha has been registered in the name of the GPA Holder of the complainants on 23.05.2024.
The records discloses that the GPA Holder of the complainants has executed a registered Gift Deed dated 21.05.2024 in favour of his wife Smt.Laxmi Manjunath. Copies of the Letter of allotment, sale deed dated 13.05.2024, Katha Certificate dated 23.05.2024, Gift deed dated 21.05.2024, Katha certificate dated 19.06.2024 and encumbrance certificates are produced herewith and marked as Annexures-R6, R6(a) to
(e).
6. At paragraph No.5 of the said compliance affidavit it is specifically stated that the entire allotment process including execution of the sale deed with a covenant of placing the allotees/purchasers in possession of the respective sites has taken place much prior to assuming
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023 charge by the present Commissioner, MUDA i.e., 03.07.2024. Therefore, there is nothing which is left un- complied by predecessor in office i.e., accused No.1 - Sri Dinesh Kumar.
7. Further, at paragraph No.6 it is stated that the order passed by this Court in WP.No.25130/2022 was only for consideration of the representation dated 28.10.2022 at Annexure-F. In compliance of the same, the accused No.1 had passed an Official Memorandum dated 21.10.2022 and issued letters of allotment and executed the absolute sale deeds in favour of GPA Holders of the complainants commencing from 05.05.2023 till 19.05.2023. When such being the position, there was no occasion for the counsel who represented the accused No.1 in WA.No.6829/2013 to make a submission to the effect that the possession of the sites would be delivered without any particulars or site numbers.
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023
8. At paragraph No.7, the accused No.1(a) states that he came to know about the order dated 12.07.2024 in WA.No.6829/2013 only after the receipt of the copy of the statement of facts from the counsel for complainants during the first week of March, 2025. Moreover, as on 12.07.2024 the sale deeds in respect of 26 sites has been executed even according to the complainants. The above contempt proceedings cannot be proceeded in further in the light of the circumstances explained above. Therefore, there is no willful disobedience or dereliction of duty in complying with any of the directions issued by this Court.
9. It is observed at paragraph No.8 that in order to enquire into the allegation of illegal allotment of sites under various circumstances, the State Government has issued several directions and also appointed a retired Judge of this Court as single member enquiry commission under the Commission of Enquires Act, 1952. The affidavits and undertakings filed by the erstwhile officers and allotment made based on the said voluntary
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023 undertakings would also become the subject matter of inquiry in the light of terms of the reference notified by the State Government on 23.07.2024. Copy of the same is produced herewith and marked as Annexure-R7.
10. On this premise, learned Senior counsel for accused No.1(a) submits that compliance affidavit filed by the accused No.1(a) may be taken on record and further proceedings against him may be dropped.
11. Learned counsel for complainants submits that the possession of the sites mentioned supra is yet to be delivered but the possession is with the land lord. This submission is placed on record.
12. In this matter Accused No.1-Sri Dinesh Kumar, Ex-Commissioner, MUDA has filed the compliance affidavit. Accused No.1(a) - A.N.Raghunandan, Commissioner, MUDA has also filed compliance affidavit which is based upon the material documents mentioned in the said compliance affidavit.
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023
13. It is the emphatic contention of the learned Senior counsel Shri S.S. Naganand and the counsel on record for the complainant that possession of six sites stated in the compliance affidavit filed by the respondent are required to be delivered to the complainants. Learned counsel for the complainants submits that six sites indicated in compliance affidavit are in the illegal occupation of third parties. This submission made by the learned Senior Counsel for the complainant which is vouched by the learned counsel Shri B.L. Sanjeev, is placed on record.
14. However, in the contempt petition, we must look into the provision of Clause 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act to persuade the matter in accordance with law. In this matter, learned Senior counsel for the respondent / accused No.1 (a) emphatically submits that the present Commissioner of MUDA has submitted detailed affidavit by referring to documents and annexures. However, this contempt petition is filed seeking for intervention by
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023 considering the grounds urged therein and more so for taking action against the respondent / accused. But for taking action against the respondent / accused in the rank of parties, it is very much required to look into the ingredients of clause 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act because it is punitive in nature. The learned Senior Counsel for the complainant submits that third parties are in the illegal possession of six sites indicated in the compliance affidavit. This submission made by the learned Senior Counsel for the complainant is vouched by the learned counsel Shri B.L. Sanjeev who has initiated this contempt petition against the respondent / accused.
15. The detailed affidavit filed by the present Commissioner of MUDA / accused No.1(a) being the present Commissioner of MUDA namely Shri Raghunandan A.N., inclusive of the affidavit filed by Shri Dinesh Kumar, Ex-Commissioner, MUDA are taken on record.
16. In this regard, it is relevant to refer to a judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023 PRITHAWI NATH RAM vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND ((2004) 7 SCC 261)). The relevant portion of the said judgment reads thus:
"If any party concerned is aggrieved by the order which in its opinion is wrong or against rules or its implementation is neither practicable nor feasible, it should always either approach to the Court that passed the order or invoke jurisdiction of the Appellate Court. Rightness or wrongness of the order cannot be urged in contempt proceedings. Right or wrong the order has to be obeyed. Flouting an order of the Court would render the party liable for contempt. While dealing with an application for contempt the Court cannot traverse beyond the order, non-compliance of which is alleged. In other words, it cannot say what should not have been done or what should have been done. It cannot traverse beyond the order. It cannot test correctness or otherwise of the order or give additional direction or delete any direction. That would be exercising review jurisdiction while dealing with an application for initiation of contempt proceedings. The same would be impermissible and indefensible. In that view of the matter, the order of the High Court is set aside and the matter is remitted for fresh consideration. It shall deal with the application in its proper perspective in accordance with law afresh. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion regarding acceptability or otherwise of the application for initiation of contempt proceedings."
- 17 -
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023
17. Keeping in view the aforesaid decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of this contempt petition and keeping in view the ingredients of Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, the compliance affidavits filed by the present Commissioner of MUDA and the Ex- Commissioner of MUDA are taken on record. However, we do not express any opinion in respect of the issue in between the complainants and respondents.
18. Whereas, learned Senior Counsel Shri S.S. Naganand seeks liberty to persuade the issues in between complainants and respondents. However, keeping in view the compliance affidavit filed by the then Commissioner of MUDA who is arraigned as Accused No.1 and the compliance affidavit filed by the Present Commissioner of MUDA who is arraigned as Accused No.1(a), it is deemed appropriate to state that liberty is granted to the complainants to proceed further in accordance with law if possession in respect of six sites have not been delivered in pursuance of the order rendered by the learned Single
- 18 -
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023 Judge in W.P.No.25130/2022 (LA-RES) vide Annexure-"A" and so also the representation which has been submitted by the petitioners therein and who being the complainants in this matter who have initiated the present contempt proceedings. Accordingly, liberty is granted as sought for.
19. Learned counsel Shri Sanjeev B.L. for the complainants submitted that six sites have been allotted by the Commissioner of MUDA, but the possession has not been delivered to the complainants and the same are in the possession of land owners. Hence he seeks liberty to proceed in accordance with law seeking restoring possession of the six sites from the land owner said to be which have been stated specifically in the compliance affidavit and also in contention taken by the learned counsel for the complainants in this matter. Consequently this contempt petition is hereby disposed of.
20. As referred to in paragraph 11, if the six sites which are mentioned in the compliance affidavits are in
- 19 -
NC: 2025:KHC:15721-DB CCC No. 626 of 2023 possession of the landlord, liberty is reserved as sought for by the learned Senior Counsel Shri S.S. Naganand to persuade the issue in between the complainants and respondents against the land owner / private parties who are in possession of the aforesaid sites. Accordingly, liberty is granted to the complainants to initiate appropriate action against the respondents / accused to deliver actual possession of the six sites indicated in detail in the compliance affidavit, in accordance with law.
21. Accordingly this contempt petition is hereby disposed of.
SD/-
(K.SOMASHEKAR) JUDGE SD/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE RJ,KS