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 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Arjun Rao vs K M Mahesh Kumar on 30 January, 2025

                                          -1-
                                                   NC: 2025:KHC:4228-DB
                                                    CCC No. 857 of 2024




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                       DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

                                       PRESENT
                      THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                          AND
                           THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
                        CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 857 OF 2024


               BETWEEN:

               1.   SRI ARJUN RAO
                    S/O LATE VENKOBA RAO
                    AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
                    RESIDING AT NO.678
                    3RD CROSS, SHIVAJI ROAD
                    HUSMANIA BLOCK
                    KALYANAGIRINAGAR
                    MYSORE-570 019
                    REPRESENTED BY HIS ATTORNEY
Digitally           HOLDER - A.S. RAVI KUMAR.
signed by H
K HEMA
Location:
High Court                                              ...COMPLAINANT
of Karnataka

               (BY SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, SENIOR ADVOCATE
               ALONG WITH SRI GIRISHA T.R., ADVOCATE)

               AND:

               1.   K.M. MAHESH KUMAR
                    S/O MUNIYAPPA
                    AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
                          -2-
                                   NC: 2025:KHC:4228-DB
                                   CCC No. 857 of 2024




     TAHSILDAR
     MYSURU TALUK
     MYSURU-570 001.

2.   LAKSHMIKANTH REDDY G.
     S/O SHARASCHANDRA REDDY
     THE CHAIRMEN
     MISSING FILE RECONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE
     MYSORE DISTRICT
     MYSORE-570 001.

3.   SEEMANTHINI
     W/O SANTHOSH
     AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
     THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
     OF PROJECT OFFICER
     CITY SURVEY, MEMBER OF
     MISSING FILE RECONSTRUCTION
     COMMITTEE MYSORE DISTRICT
     NAZARABAD
     MYSORE-570 001.

4.   K. RAKSHIT
     S/O RAMESH K.H.
     AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
     ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
     MYSORE SUB DIVISION
     MEMBER OF MISSING FILE
     RECONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE
     MYSORE DISTRICT
     MYSORE-570 001.
                                      ...ACCUSED

5.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
     REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
                              -3-
                                          NC: 2025:KHC:4228-DB
                                          CCC No. 857 of 2024




   DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
   VIDHANA SOUDHA
   BENGALURU-560 001.


                                   ...PROFORMA RESPONDENT

(BY SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA)

    THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF
THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO INITIATE
CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR
HAVING DISOBEYED THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE
COURT   DATED   26.02.2024    IN    CCC    NO.40/2023   (CIVIL)
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D AND ORDER DATED 29.09.2022
IN WRIT PETITION NO.19706/2022 (KLR-RR/SUR) PASSED BY
THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED
FOR WILLFULLY AND DELIBERATELY DISOBEYING THE
ORDERS PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT AND FURTHER
ENFORCE THE ORDER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
       N. V. ANJARIA
       and
       HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
                                  -4-
                                                NC: 2025:KHC:4228-DB
                                                CCC No. 857 of 2024




                        ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Vikram Huilgol assisted by learned advocate Mr. T.R. Girisha for the complainant and learned Additional Government Advocate Smt. Pramodhini Kishan for the respondent State and its authorities.

2. Learned Single Judge while disposing of the writ petition as per its order dated 29.09.2022 permitted the petitioner to file an application to the Tahsildar, Mysuru Taluka, who was in turn directed to consider the application of the petitioner within stipulated time. The subject matter was regarding conducting of phodi and durast work in respect of the land in Survey No.181 admeasuring 5 acres situated at Srirampura, Kasaba Hobli, Mysuru Taluka.

3. It appears that in respect of the said directions, a contempt proceedings were required to be filed which was CCC No.40 of 2023 which was disposed of by the Division Bench on 26.02.2024 wherein, the complainant was permitted to supply further documents relating to record of the case to be placed before the -5- NC: 2025:KHC:4228-DB CCC No. 857 of 2024 Missing File Reconstruction Committee since the said documents were not available. The case of the complainant was directed to be considered after complainant submits such documents before the Missing File Reconstruction Committee.

4. In response to the present contempt petition, compliance affidavit came to be filed and also was filed memo dated 30.01.2025 by learned Additional Government Advocate on behalf of the State along with which copy of endorsement dated 18.01.2025 passed by the Tahsildar, Mysuru Taluka, Mysuru has been produced.

5. As per the said endorsement the request of the petitioner to conduct durast in respect of the land in question came to be rejected for the reason stated in the endorsement which included that the documents produced are found to be fake and fabricated.

6. Since the endorsement is passed, contempt petition does not survive as the directions of learned Single Judge stands complied with.

7. Accordingly, the contempt petition is disposed of. -6-

NC: 2025:KHC:4228-DB CCC No. 857 of 2024 At this stage, learned Senior Counsel wanted the Court to reserve liberty for the complainant to challenge the aforesaid endorsement on merits. He further submitted that the complainant also wants to challenge the proceedings of the meetings.

The liberty on both the course is reserved for the complainant by instituting appropriate independent proceedings in that regard, in respect of which however this Court does not express any opinion on merits.

Sd/-

(N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-

(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53