Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Mr. Rajagopal Venkatesan Iyer vs Commander A.K George, I.N. (Retd.) on 27 August, 2015

Bench: N.Kumar, G.Narendar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015

                      PRESENT

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR
                        AND
      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR
     C.C.C.Nos.1015 & 1021/2015 (Civil)

BETWEEN :
1.   Mr. Rajagopal Venkatesan Iyer
     Aged about 65 years,
     S/o Mr.Venkatesan Rajagopal

2.   Mrs. Jeanatte Iyer
     Aged about 59 years,
     W/o Mr.Rajagopal V. Iyer

     Both are r/at Apt.D5, 'J' Block,
     Golden Orchid, Lavelle Road,
     Bangalore-560 001                ...COMPLAINANTS

(By Sri Rajagopal Venkatesan Iyer & Smt.Jeanatte Iyer,
                 party - in - persons.)



AND :
1.   Commander A.K. George, I.N. (Retd.)
     Major
                            -2-

2.   Mrs. Rajeshwari Reddy, Major

3.   Mr. Joseph S., Major

     Nos.1 & 2 have their office at
     (per letterhead used by them)
     TF-3, Dukes Mansion,
     100 Spencer Road, Frazer Town,
     Bangalore-560 005                       ...ACCUSED

                         . . . .
     These CCCs are filed under Sections 10 and 12 of
the Contempt of Courts Act, praying to take
congnizance of the civil contempt committed by the
accused against the Hon'ble City Civil Court's order
dated 18th June 2015 in O.S.No.5139/2004 at
Annexure-F.

    These CCCs coming on for orders, this day,
N.Kumar J., made the following:


                      ORDER

These contempt petitions are filed complaining that in spite of the order dated 18.06.2015 passed by the Trial Court allowing the application filed by plaintiff No.2 under Order II Rule 4 of CPC to discharge the Advocate and to conduct the case in person and permitting the complainant to prosecute the case, the -3- Advocates are obstructing the course of the proceedings by appearing in the case and filing documents.

2. The said allegation amounts to criminal contempt and not civil contempt as there is no violation of any lawful order passed by this Court. In that view of the matter, these contempt petitions are rejected reserving liberty to the complainants to file criminal contempt proceedings.

Sd/-

JUDGE Sd/-

JUDGE SPS