IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 13'": DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2010
PRESENT
THE HONBLE MR.-J.S.KI-IEHAR, CHIEF " %
AND
THE HONELE MRSJUSTICE2:
ccc NO. 293/201«O.{Q\/1L),*37 - A 1
BETWEEN V' V' 1'
K.Srikanth R30, _ VA
Aged about 42 years.
The Commissioner, _
City i\/Iunicip.g:§ACC0.un§:i1, 1.
Madikeri, Kc;-giagu ._.Dis'trici. _ V ,
(Described ir1_,."i:hé'Cr(1é:5faEs'" K _
Chief Qffice1j,"'1'«i«;3,di}ieriTovm"
Municipali gm .
. V _ . ...Comp1ainant
(By Sri N'.CDeVadva'ssA,ASériiior Counsel for
M/ Nyayamitra Advocates.)
. ~Sri_VB.Paramv::Shwaram,
AMadik¢:ri, Kodagu District.
Aggad abogt. 56 years,
Shop No. i / 8, Private Bus Stand,
...Accu.sed
'{By Sri.K§Char1drashekar, 8: Sri.C.§~EE.Jadhav, Advocates}
This CCC is file/tunder Section 1} & 12 of the
contempt of Court Act, by the complainant where in he
prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to initiate
contempt proceedings against the accused, for
disobeying direction dated 24.06.2008 pa.ssed~._in
W.P.No.-42671/2002(LB~RES) c/w. W.P.No.4;3_382','2002
and order of the division bench dated 2%!-:O2l'.'2.'T)39
W.A.No. I 108/2008 [LB~RES) Vide AnneXnre«--A 8§B.'
This CCC coming on for;"orde'rs..Vt'his'
JUSTICE passed the following:
J.S.KHEHAR, C.J. (om):
The accused--res4pbr1dle3gf:*. this Court by
filing a writ petition was
disrnissed __o'rder passed by this
CourtWo'I'1 directed the accused
resporiedelnt, to [aossession of the shop taken
on lease him Awlitliin three months. Despite the
V' _ a.foresai.d,'vi--possessiun was not handed over.
0 V0 2. dated 24.63.2008 was assailed by the
ac.ciased.+resfi;0ndent by filing a writ appeal. The
af0resa_id Writ appeal was also dismissed on 24.2.2008.
._:3~till.'.-'possession remained with the acctlsed-respondent.
Ca)
8. The instant contempt p€l,illi0’fi came to be filed
at the hands of the Municipal Council, Madikeri on
account of the disobedience of the orders pElSS€’§(lVV’iii\1:7′”E_l1lS
Court. The accused respondent has been
the learned counsel representingyhim.*h’asl’har1devd'”
over the key of the shoplg
Commissioner, City Municipal C’ouncil,C’ lviad-i1ie*ri in’-‘
Court today in token, of ‘oyjer .po’ssesslon. It is.
therefore, submitted ‘counsel for the
acct1sed~respondve_nt has now been
handed ox? Court stands fully
comp1iied”2x.ziti.?1. V
the matter in its entirety, we
are._§of the \}’ie_i,yithat the lapse at the hands of the
. ae.cused–.respondent in not Voluntarily obeying orders
‘passedl’l*§fy._ Court is Very serious. As long as a
con’ternpt’}§:etitioz1 had not been filed at the hands of the
Municiijal Council, l\/Iadikeri. [so as to enforce the
l’direct.ions issued by this Court], possession of. the
H leased shop was not handed over to the complainant»
petitioner. Orders of this Court need to be complied with
unilaterally. The accused-respor1deni: and others
similarly situate as him having not abided by this
Courts orders {referred to above), consequently
as 78 contempt petitions had to be
complainant~petitioner to enforcreeeethe dir’ectio’n,s”is;sued ”
by this Court. Besides resiiltingca.
expense, this action of th_e’*~.taccused–respon..denVthasfl’
resulted in unnecessary We,
therefore, Consider iltlljxust to impose
costs on ;”ll’ll”he accusedm
respondent’ to pay costs
quantified five thousand). While
payin$’._the :accused~respondent shall
deposit Rsfl ()nV,’OOV(}./;’*{teiiflV thousand) with the Karnataka
nCoulnc’ii’;”Rs.10,000/– with the Advocates
,._.Ag.5oei;i’:io114l;’ Bangalore, and the remaining
thousand) with the complainant»
l\A/Iunicipial Council, Madikeri. Receipts thereof, shall be
on the record Within one month from today,
it .,._failing which, the Registry is directed to re-list this case
for motion hearing, so as to enforce payment of costs.