IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CCC NO.1019 OF 2019 & CCC NOS.1048-1050 OF 2019 (CIVIL) BETWEEN:
1. MR. RAMESH SHARMA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS SON OF RAMKUMAR SHARMA RESIDING AT NO.1-26 JEEVANBHEEMANAGAR HAL II STAGE BENGALURU-560 075.
2. MRS. HEMA NAGARAJ WIFE OF MR. NAGARAJ G.N. AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.322, SARASWATHI 1ST BLOCK, 3RD MAIN 5TH CROSS, OPP. BDA COMPLEX R.T. NAGAR BENGALURU-560 032.
3. MR. JASMENDER SHARMA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS SON OF RAMKUMAR SHARMA RESIDING AT NO.46, BEHIND RING ROAD HORAMAVU VILLAGE K.R. PURAM HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK-560 024.
4. MRS. SHARANYA N. SHETTY AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS WIFE OF MR. A.N. SHETTY RESIDING AT NO.2, NELE 1ST MAIN, 1ST STAGE 4TH CROSS, VINAYAKA LAYOUT HEBBAL, KEMPAPURA BENGALURU-560 024. ... COMPLAINANTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMED MUJJASSIM, ADVOCATE) AND:
SMT. ASHAKUMARI THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS – OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS & SURVEY K.R. CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 001. ... ACCUSED (BY SRI. SHIVAPRABHU S. HIREMATH, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) THESE CONTEMPT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT 1971, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR HAVING DELIBERATELY DISOBEYED THE ORDER OF THIS COURT PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NOS.46894 TO 46897 OF 2014 DATED 13.10.2014 MARKED AT ANNEXURE-A, AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR ORDERS AS THIS COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THESE CONTEMPT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER These contempt petitions are filed on the ground that the order dated 13.10.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition Nos.46894- 46897 of 2014 has been disobeyed. In terms of the said order, the respondent therein was directed to consider the application of the writ petitioners and pass appropriate orders within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the order dated 13.10.2014. Since the same was not done, the instant petitions are filed.
2. A counter affidavit is filed by the accused on 08.07.2019 enclosing Annexures-R1 to R10. Yet another additional counter affidavit is filed in the Court today along with Annexure-R11. The case of the accused is that there is a serious dispute with regard to the property as per the City Survey Records and that the land in question comes within an open area. The same is not enquired by the concerned Enquiry Officer and therefore, no enquiry was conducted. A letter was also addressed to the Enquiry Officer. It is stated therein that only after conducting enquiry by the concerned Officer and the same is accepted and confirmed by the relevant authorities, that the matter could be proceed with.
3. In view of the serious dispute with regard to the nature of land etc., we do not find any ground to proceed further in the matter. The learned Single Judge has passed an order on the assumption that the request of the writ petitioners has not been considered. None of the objections of the State were placed for consideration before the learned Single Judge.
4. In view of the affidavits filed by the accused enclosing Annexures-R1 to R11, we do not find that any contempt has been committed. Hence, the proceedings are dropped.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE ST