Karnataka High Court
C G Jagadeesh vs Sri R Krishnamoorthy on 5 December, 2012
Bench: D.V.Shylendra Kumar, B.Manohar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2012
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D V SHYLENDRA KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B MANOHAR
CCC [Civil] No.1444 of 2012
BETWEEN:
C G JAGADEESH
S/O LATE SRI C N GOPAL
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
R/AT NO.1/4, GANGADHARA
CHETTY ROAD, BANGALORE
BANGALORE CITY ... COMPLAINANT
[By Sri C Gowri Shankar, Adv.]
AND:
1. SRI R KRISHNAMOORTHY
S/O LATE SRI RAJACHARI
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
PROPRIETOR OF
M/S BALAJI AUTO GARAGE
CARRYING ON BUSINESS AT
# 28, KENSINGTON ROAD
BANGALORE - 560 042
2
2. SRI K DHANDAPANI
S/O SRI R KRISHNAMOORTHY
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
DESCRIBES AS PROPRIETOR OF
M/S BALAJI AUTO GARAGE
CARRYING ON BUSINESS AT
# 26, KENSINGTON ROAD
BANGALORE - 560 042 ... ACCUSED
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 & 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT BY THE COMPLAINANT, WHEREIN HE
PRAYS THAT THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT BE PLEASED TO INITIATE
CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR
DISOBEYING THE ORDER DATED 18.03.2010 PASSED BY THE CITY
CIVIL COURT, BANGALORE, CCH-20 IN OS.NO.26708/2007 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A AFFIRMED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN RFA 963/2010
ON 17.06.2010 VIDE ANNEXURE - C AND ETC.,
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS
DAY, SHYLENDRA KUMAR, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This contempt petition is by the respondent in RFA No.963/2010 (EJE) before this court complaining that the accused persons, who had given an undertaking before this court to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the suit schedule premises to the complainant by 31.6.2012 have even after lapse of the period not handed over the possession of the premises and even in the execution proceedings for execution of the order, have been raising frivolous objections 3 and such conduct on the part of the accused persons elicits action in contempt jurisdiction.
2. Appearing on behalf of the complainant submission of Sri C. Gowri Shankar, learned counsel is that the accused persons particularly, the 1st accused has not only breached the undertaking executed before this court to vacate the premises, but also set up his son as an obstructionist and his conduct clearly lacks bona fides and is contumacious.
3. Proceedings having its origin in civil proceedings and suit being one for ejection, we refrain to exercise contempt jurisdiction in a matter of this nature, as execution petition has already been filed and matter is before the executing court. It is open to the complainant to pursue the proceedings before the execution court and point out the frivolous nature of obstruction and lack of bona fides on the part of the 1st accused, in resisting execution.
4. Without prejudice to the rights and remedies of the complainant elsewhere in accordance with law, this 4 contempt petition is dismissed. It is open to the complainant to move the executing court for expeditious disposal of the execution petition.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE NG*