Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 11043
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
SMT. SHIVAMMA – Appellant
Versus
SRI. DINESH KUMAR – Respondent
CCC 626 / 2023
Compliance with court orders is essential in contempt proceedings; grievances should be pursued through appropriate legal channels.
Headnote:(A) Contempt of Courts Act - Clause 2(b) - Willful disobedience of court orders - The complainants allege non-compliance with a prior order regarding site possession. The respondents submitted compliance affidavits detailing actions taken regarding site allotments. The court emphasized that contempt proceedings cannot question the merits of the original order but must focus on compliance. (Paras 1, 16, 17)
(B) Compliance Affidavit - The affidavits presented by the respondents indicate that all necessary actions regarding site allotment and possession were taken prior to the present proceedings. The court observed that if possession remained with third parties, complainants could seek legal recourse. (Paras 8, 19)
Findings of Court:
The court accepted the compliance affidavits and granted liberty to the complainants to pursue legal action if required.
Issues: The main issue was whether the respondents had willfully disobeyed the court’s prior order regarding site possession.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that compliance with prior orders is paramount in contempt proceedings, and any grievances should be addressed through appropriate legal channels.
Result: Contempt petition disposed of.
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR)
This contempt petition has been initiated by complainants – Smt.Shivamma and others against the accused for willful disobedience to the order dated 15.12.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP.Nos.25130/2022 (LA-RES) vide Annexure-A.
2. Learned Senior counsel Sri S.S.Naganand represents learned counsel Sri Sanjeev B.L who is on record for complainants. Learned Senior counsel Sri M.B.Naragund appears for learned counsel Sri T.P.Vivekananda who is on record for accused No.1(a). Learned counsel Sri Ganesh Gowda represents learned counsel Sri Ganapati Bhat Vajralli who is on record for accused No.1.
3. Paragraph No.3 of the learned Single Judge’s order states that it is the grievance of the petitioners that their representation dated 28.10.2022 at Annexure-F submitted to the respondent Authority has not been considered so far by the respondents nor any order has been passed on the same. Under these circumstances, the petitioners are before the Court by way of the present petition. Thereafter in Para No.5 the learned Single Judge has directed the respondent Authority to address the grievances of the petitioners and consider their representation dated 28.10.2022 at Annexure-F and pass the appropriate order in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks.
4. Learned counsel seeks for consideration of the compliance affidavit dated 05.03.2025 filed by the accused No.1-Sri.Dinesh Kumar, Ex-Commissioner, MUDA.
5. Learned Senior counsel Sri M.B.Naragund for accused No.1(a)-Sri.A.N.Raghunandan, Commissioner, MUDA submits that the said accused No.1(a) has also filed compliance affidavit dated 01.04.2025 with documents at Sl.No.2 to 32. At paragraph No.3 of the said affidavit it is stated that on the previous date of hearing i.e., on 20.03.2025, taking note of the submission made on behalf of the complainants that possession of the site bearing Nos.118/2, 118/3, 89, 105, 108 and 109 are yet to be delivered. He also submits that possession of sites stated supra shall be delivered after verification of concerned documents. Even after last date of hearing, present Commissioner of MUDA had verified the documents concerning the aforementioned sites. The details of the said verification are as follows:
i) The record discloses that site No.118/2 was allotted in terms of the letter of allotment dated 08.02.2023. The absolute sale deed has been executed on 19.04.2023 in favour of the GPA Holder of the complainants directly with the following covenant regarding possession:
On 07.06.2023, the GPA Holder of the complainants executed a Deed of Settlement in favour of Sri Naveen Bose conveying the aforesaid site with the following covenant:
“Ever since the said date, the Settle is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule property without any let or hindrance from anyone, by getting the Katha of the said property registered in the revenue records of the MUDA and has paid the assessment in respect of the above mentioned property to the MUDA.”
The GPA Holder of the complainants executed a Rectification Deed on 18.03.2024 substituting the paragraph concerning the financial adjustment between the Settlor and the Setlee. Neither in the sale deed executed by the MUDA nor in the Settlement Deed and the Rectification Deed, there is a mention about the obligation of MUDA to deliver possession of the aforementioned site at a later date. Thus, it is clear that the GPA holder of the complainants has obtained the registered sale deed and transferred the aforementioned site in favour of Mr.Naveen Bhose through a Settlement Deed followed by Deed of Rectification. Copies of the Letter of allotment, sale deed dated 19.04.2023, Katha Certificate dated 24.02.2023, Settlement deed dated 07.06.2023 and encumbrance certificates are produced herewith and marked as Annexures-R1, R1(a) to (e).
ii) As regards the site No.118/3 is concerned, the copies of the documents obtained from the office of the Sub-Registrar dis
