Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 459
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
B.VEERAPPA, K. S. HEMALEKHA, JJ
SMT. PRAMODA DEVI WADIYAR – Appellant
Versus
SRI TUSHAR GIRI NATH – Respondent
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 637 OF 2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI JAYAKUMAR S. PATIL, SRI S. RAJENDRA
For the Respondents: SRI KIRAN KUMAR
Failure to comply with court orders can lead to contempt proceedings, but compliance must be established to avoid such penalties.
Headnote:(A) Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Sections 11 and 12 - Civil contempt petition filed against State authorities for willfully disobeying court orders directing entries in revenue records of the complainant's name - Court found that compliance affidavits submitted by the State Government demonstrated adherence to previous judgments and directions - Court held that contempt proceedings were dropped as the State complied with the order. (Paras 1, 11, 17)
(B) Compliance with Court Orders - Principles regarding compliance and the scope of contempt proceedings were considered, emphasizing that it cannot decide disputed rights outside the contempt jurisdiction. (Paras 15, 16)
Facts of the case:
Complainant alleged non-compliance by State authorities would result in disruption of her recognized rights related to property following a detailed order from the learned Single Judge.
Findings of Court:
The court noted that the State had complied with the order and the appropriate entries were rectified as per the law.
Issues: Whether the State authorities willfully disobeyed the court order, and the jurisdiction of the court to evaluate compliance in contempt proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the compliance affidavits showed adherence to directions, thus dropping contempt proceedings.
Result: Contempt proceedings are hereby dropped.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegation of non-compliance with court orders. (Para 1 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. court's finding on compliance affidavits and obligation of authorities. (Para 2 , 3 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. arguments regarding the compliance of state government to the court's order. (Para 5 , 10) |
| 4. clarification on the contempt provisions and court's limited jurisdiction. (Para 9 , 16) |
| 5. final ruling on contempt proceedings. (Para 17) |
ORDER
The complainants have filed the present contempt petition under the provisions of Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act to initiate contempt proceedings against accused for having willfully disobeyed the order, dated 19.6.2020, passed in W.P.No. 22658-662/2015 and connected cases particularly in W.P.No.25592/2015 by the learned Single Judge of this Court, directing the Revenue Authorities/Municipal Authorities to consider making appropriate entries in the name of the complainant upon representations being made in accordance with law and as per the applicable procedure, in light of the findings made in the order.
2. Since the said order passed by the learned Single Judge has not been complied with and has attained finality, the appeal filed by the State before the Hon'ble Supreme Court came to be dismissed.
3. In response to the notice issued, the State Government filed compliance affidavits on so many occasions and as this Court was not satisfied with the way in which the compliance affidavits are filed by State Government, ultimately a compliance affidavit dated 17.1.2023 along with Annexures- R1 to 8 is filed specifically stating at paragraphs 6 to 9 as under:
"6. I state that in compliance of the Order dated 19.06.2020 pertaining to Paragraph II (a) and (d) i.e., the entries pertaining to name of the 'Government' and 'B Kharab entry' in the RTC extract in respect of the land bearing Sy. No.39 of Chowdahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk, measuring in an extent of 259.27 Acres; Survey No.41 of Alanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk, measuring in an extent of 173.37 Acres and Survey No.4 of Kurubarahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk, measuring in an extent of 1541.31 Acres have been deleted as per MR No.T2/2021-22, T3/2021-22 dated 11.08.2021 and T2/2021-22 dated 23.09.2021 respectively. The photocopies of the Mutation Registrar Extracts are produced as Annexures-R1, R2 & and; R3 respectively.
7. I state that in pursuance of the aforesaid Mutation Order, the RTC extract of land bearing Survey No.39 of Chowdahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk; Survey No.41 of Alanahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk and Survey No.4 of Kurubarahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysore Taluk, are rectified. The photocopies of the RTC extract in respect of the aforesaid lands for the year 2015 and 2021 are produced as ANNEXURES-R4, R5 & and; R6 series respectively. Hence, the direction dated 19.06.2020 at Para II (a) and (d) are complied. Regarding Para II (b) and (c) of the order dated 19.06.2020
8. I state that the Complainant had given representation dated 05.08.2020, 14.08.2020, 02.08.2021 and the said representation was considered and the endorsement has been issued to the Complainant. The Photocopies of the Endorsement is produced as ANNEXURES- R7 respectively. As such, the direction dated 19.06.2020 at Para II (b) and (c) in respect of Complainant is complied with..
9. I most respectfully submit that subsequent to the aforementioned contentions being raised in the Affidavit dated 22.09.2022, the Complainant has given one more representation to our Office on 06.12.2022 The said representation was also considered in accordance with law and a Show-Cause-Notice has dated 11.01.2023. Copy of the said Show- Cause-Notice dated 11.01.2023 is herewith produced and marked as Annexure-R8."
4. In turn, a rejoinder to the compliance affidavit has been filed by the complainant contending that instead of complying with the order, the accused have issued an endorsement which is nothing but a contempt and thereb
