Karnataka High Court
Sri.V.Shyama Sundar Raju vs Sri.Rajesh Gowda on 26 May, 2022
Author: B.Veerappa
Bench: B.Veerappa
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MAY, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA
CCC No.509 of 2021 (CIVIL)
BETWEEN:
SRI.V.SHYAMA SUNDAR RAJU
S/O M V VASANTHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/AT NO.2, 1ST CROSS
OTC ROAD BALEPETE
BENGALURU - 560 053
... COMPLAINANT
(By Sri : SUNDARESH H C, ADV.)
AND:
SRI.RAJESH GOWDA
THE COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
T CHOWDAIAH ROAD
KUMARA KRUPA WEST
BANGALORE - 560 020
... ACCUSED
(By Sri: B.VACHAN, ADV.)
2
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF
THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO
SECURE THE ACCUSED HEREIN AND INITIATE CONTEMPT
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR DISOBEYING
THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN
W.P.NO.18788/2019 DATED 25.11.2019 AS PER
ANNEXURE-A AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR 'HEARING BEFORE
FRAMING OF CHARGES' THIS DAY, B.VEERAPPA J., MADE
THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
It is unfortunate that the complainant is dragged before this Court for the fourth time by filing the present Contempt Petition to take action against the accused under the provisions of Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act for willful disobedience of the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 25-11-2019 in Writ Petition No.18788/2019 wherein the learned Single Judge having considered the peculiar circumstances of the case, issued directions, which reads as under:-
"3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds it appropriate to direct the respondent to 3 consider the representations submitted by the petitioner dated 13.11.2014, 20.02.2017 and 07.08.2018 at Annexures-H, J and K. respectively, keeping in mind the order of this Court in W.P.No.15726/2013 decided on 21.06.2013 and to take a decision in an expedite manner in any event not later than eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order."
In view of this, the accused ought to have passed the order on or before 24-03-2020. Very strangely, the BDA filed a Writ Appeal No.1205/2021 before the coordinate Bench. The coordinate Bench, after hearing the parties, on 08-03-2022, dismissed the appeal. It held as under:-
"Thus, it is evident that no right has been created in favour of the respondent by learned single Judge but only a direction has been issued which is confines the appellant to consider the representations in light of the observations made by this Court in the decision dated 21.06.2013 passed in WP No.15726 which has attained finality and the appellant is bound to consider the 4 representations submitted by the respondent. We do not find any infirmity in the order passed by learned Single Judge warranting interference of this court in this intra court appeal.
In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed."
The order passed by the coordinate Bench has reached finality. Inspite of the order passed by the Division Bench, the accused has not passed any orders on or before 24-03-2022.
2. Meanwhile, the complainant filed the present contempt petition on 15th July, 2021 alleging disobedience of the order passed by the learned Single Judge. During the pendency of the contempt proceedings, the accused filed writ appeal No.1205/2021. During the pendency of the contempt petition, the Division Bench of this Court after hearing both the parties by the order dated 08th March, 2022, dismissed the appeal.
5Now, the accused has filed the affidavit dated 26-05-2022. In paras 6 and 7 it is stated as under:-
"6. I state that subsequent thereto, the representations dated 13.11.2014, 20.02.2017 and 07.08.2018 were considered by the BDA keeping in mind the order of the Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.15726/2013 and accordingly an endorsement dated 21.03.2022 has been issued. The copy of the said endorsement is produced as Annexure R1.
7. I submit that there has been some delay in complying with the order passed by this Hon'ble Court. Immediately after taking charge as a Commissioner of BDA, I had to consult the legal section and the allotment section. I submit that after consultation the appeal was filed and subsequently, the endorsement at Annexure R1 has been issued. Hence there is some delay in complying with the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court. The delay is neither intentional nor deliberate but for the bona fide reasons as mentioned above. I submit that the order passed by this Hon'ble Court has now been complied and I seek an 6 unconditional apology for the delay caused in complying the order passed by this Hon'ble Court."
It is noted that the matter was kept pending for more than two years and thereby the complainant is forced to file petition after petitions to ventilate his grievances. If the order passed by the learned Single Judge is not challenged within the time stipulated, the accused ought to have considered and passed orders within the time stipulated by the learned Single Judge. Unfortunately, no writ appeal is filed within the time stipulated, but allowed the complainant to file contempt petition before this Court on 15-07-2021. Thereafter the accused thought it fit to file writ appeal. The writ appeal came to be dismissed on 08-12-2022 and the order passed by the Division Bench has reached finality. Thereafter complied the direction issued by the learned Single Judge by rejecting the claim of the complainant after more than two years and unnecessarily dragged the complainant to this Court not 7 only in the contempt proceedings but also in the writ appeal thereby the complainant had to spend litigation expenses in the writ petition, contempt petition and writ appeal and that is not the intention of the order passed by the learned Single Judge. When a specific direction was issued by this Court, it is the duty of the accused to comply with the order within the time stipulated. If the accused is aggrieved, he should have approached the Court within the time stipulated. Even though the accused filed Writ Appeal, the same was dismissed thereby the accused has issued the present endorsement by rejecting the claim of the complainant. Hence, the act of the accused is nothing but to harass the complainant, both mentally and financially and had to spend the litigation expenses by engaging lawyers in both petitions and one more litigation is created by way of the impugned order.
3. It is well settled that any order passed by the court should be complied within the time stipulated. If the order is not challenged, the accused cannot take his own 8 time and after contempt petition being filed, he cannot file appeal and after dismissal, the endorsement is issued. It clearly indicates that the complainant is unnecessarily dragged to this Court by spending litigation expenses thereby, the accused is liable to pay the cost of the litigation throughout. On 21-03-2022, the order of the learned Single Judge has been complied, thereby rejecting the claim of the petitioner. It is for the complainant to challenge the same, if he is so aggrieved, in accordance with law.
In view of the above, we pass the following:-
ORDER
i) The contempt proceedings initiated by the complainant is disposed off, subject to the condition that the accused shall pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant, towards the cost of the litigation(writ petition, writ appeal and contempt proceedings) within a period of four weeks.9
ii) It is always open for the complainant to challenge the endorsement dated 21-03-2022 if he is so advised, in accordance with law.
iii) If the accused fails to pay the cost, within the time stipulated by this Court, the complainant is at liberty to move this Court.
SD/-
JUDGE SD/-
JUDGE Rsk/-