IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL & THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA CCC No.960/2016 (CIVIL) BETWEEN SMT.SHASHIKALA J.SHETTY W/O SRI JAYARAM SHETTY AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS KEMBARJE HOUSE, BELALU ROAD D.K.DISTRICT-574 240. ... COMPLAINANT (By Sri THARANATH SHETTY K., ADV.) AND 1. MAHESH SHETTY THIMARODI S/O VITTAL SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, THIMARODI HOUSE, UJIRE VILLAGE AND POST, BELTHANGADY TALUK D.K.DISTRICT-574214 2. VAMANA BENDE S/O KESHAVA BENDE AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, SHRINIDHI STORES, UJIRE TOWN BELTHANGADY TALUK D.K.DISTRICT-574 214 3. MANOJ KUNJARPA S/O MAHABALA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS KUNJARPA HOUSE UJIRE VILLAGE AND POST BELTHANGADY TALUK D.K.DISTRICT-574 214 4. JAYADEVA S/O SHESHAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS VIDYANAGAR, KUNJARPA UJIRE VILLAGE & POST BELTHANGADY TALUK D.K.DISTRICT-574 214 5. PREETHAM SHETTY S/O LATE PADMANABHA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, KUNJARPA HOUSE UJIRE VILLAGE & POST, BELTHANGADY TALUK D.K.DISTRICT-574 214 6. SRI B.R.LINGAPPA (DELETED V/C/O DT.31.8.2016) 7. SRI SANDESH KUMAR B.G. (DELETED V/C/O DT.31.8.2016) (By Sri P.KARUNAKAR, ADV.) ... ACCUSED THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 10 & 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT 1971, PRAYING THAT THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT BE PLEASED TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR THEIR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED 16.11.2015 PASSED ON I.A.NO.2 IN M.A.NO.6/2015 BY THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT BELTHANGADY, D K DISTRICT AND PUNISH THEM FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT AS PER THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, AND ETC.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, B.S.PATIL, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER 1. We have heard the learned counsel for all the parties.
2. Perused the order dated 22.08.2017 passed by this Court in this proceeding.
3. Learned Additional Government Advocate has filed compliance report stating that order passed by this Court on 22.08.2017 has been complied with.
4. Learned counsel for both parties submit that the area has been fenced and key of the shed constructed in the land has been handed over to the complainant.
5. In view of the above, as the order of temporary injunction granted in M.A.No.6/2015 dated 16.11.2015 violation of which was the cause for initiation of present contempt proceedings has been since complied with including the direction issued by this Court in this contempt petition on 22.08.2017, we do not find it necessary to keep this matter pending, particularly because the interim order granted by the Court below in miscellaneous appeal was an exparte order passed without hearing the other side.
6. Hence, this contempt petition is closed. However, complainant will be at liberty to prosecute the application filed seeking temporary injunction and accused - respondents will be also at liberty to defend themselves in the proceedings before the Court below. We make it clear that observations made and directions issued in this contempt petition are confined only for disposal of the issue raised in this contempt petition and shall not affect the merits while considering the application filed for temporary injunction pending in the appeal. The fact that the respondents have purged the contempt has weighed in our mind to close the contempt proceedings.
Sd/- JUDGE PKS Sd/- JUDGE