Karnataka High Court
M/S Esteem Enclave vs State Of Karnataka on 28 June, 2018
Bench: Raghvendra S.Chauhan, H T Narendra Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2018
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD
C.C.C. NO.1810/2017 (CIVIL)
BETWEEN:
M/S. ESTEEM ENCLAVE
A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
HAVING ITS PLACE OF BUSINESS AT
NOS.32, 33, AND 34, SNS CHAMBERS,
NO.239, SANKEY ROAD,
SADASHIVANAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 080,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER,
MR. NARAINDAS BODARAM,
S/O. LATE BODARAM,
AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS. ... COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI SRIDHAR G., ADV.)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE-560 001.
2. BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
NR SQUARE,
BANGALORE-560 002,
REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
2
3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
ARAKERE SUB-DIVISION,
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
NR SQUARE,
BANGALORE-560 002.
4. MR. MUNINARAYAN
FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN
4(A) BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE
SMT. MALINI,
W/O. LATE MR. MUNINARAYAN,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
38/2, ARAKERE GATE,
OPPOSITE CORPORATION BANK,
BANNERGHATTA MAIN ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 076. ... ACCUSED
(BY SRI I. G. GACHCHINAMATH, ADV. FOR A-3;
SRI B. M. ARUN, ADV. FOR A-4(A);
NOTICE TO A-1 & A-2 IS NOT NECESSARY
V/O DATED 27.11.2017)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 215 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO INITIATE THE
CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR
WILLFULLY VIOLATION AND DELIBERATE DISOBEDIENCE OF
THE DIRECTION GIVEN BY THIS HON'BLE COURT BY ITS
JUDGEMENT DATED 28.06.2017, PASSED IN
W.P.NO.19796/2013 AND ETC.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN J, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In compliance of the order dated 12.06.2018, the accused No.3 has filed his report with regard to the issue, whether the pit has been filled up or not by the 3 accused No.4? And with regard to the issue, as to what material has been used to fill up the said pit?
2. According to the report, the pit has been filled up with soil. In order to support the plea, photographs of the site in question have also been filed. The learned counsel for the complainant agrees that the pit has been filled up.
3. Therefore, the direction issued by this Court has been complied with. Hence, no contempt is made out.
The contempt proceeding is hereby dropped.
SD/-
JUDGE SD/-
JUDGE VP