IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CCC NO.1500 OF 2017 AND CCC NOS.1877-1879 OF 2017 AND CCC NO.1173 OF 2018 (CIVIL) BETWEEN:
1. SRI JINENDRA KUMAR GANDHI SON OF MOOLCHAND GANDHI AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.
2. SMT. URMILA GANDHI WIFE OF MOOLENDRA KUMAR GANDHI AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.
3. SMT. BABY GANDHI WIFE OF JINENDRA KUMAR GANDHI AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.
4. SRI AMITH GANDHI SON OF MOOLENDRA KUMAR GANDHI AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS.
5. SMT.DEEPIKA JAIN DAUGHTER OF MOOLENDRA KUMAR GANDHI AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT CARE OF MICRO STRAPS AVALAHALLI, TIMBER YARD LAYOUT MYSORE ROAD BENGALURU-560 026.
... COMPLAINANTS (BY SRI: PARAS JAIN, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI DHANJI BHAI D. PATEL RESIDING AT NO.9, CHANAKYAPURI HUBLI.
2. SRI GOVIND DHANJI PATEL RESIDING AT NO.9, CHANAKYAPURI HUBLI.
3. SRI P. PREMCHAND SON OF SRI.G. PARASMAL AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.1123 GEETHA ROAD, CHAMARAJAPURAM MYSURU-570 004.
4. SRI KETAN S. SHAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.R-103 KENT GARDEN, 1ST FLOOR TP J - 103, BORIVALLI WEST MUMBAI.
5. SRI RAHUL S. SHAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.602, SPARTA-II PRESTIGE ACROPOLIS HOSUR MAIN ROAD BENGALURU.
6. SRI RAJEEV S. SHAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.602, SPARTA-II PRESTIGE ACROPOLIS HOSUR MAIN ROAD BENGALURU.
7. SRI GOPILAL LADHA SON OF SRI RAMPAL AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.2741, 17TH CROSS 8TH ‘B’ MAIN ROAD, BSK II STAGE BENGALURU-560 070.
8. SRI VINAY MAHESHWARI SON OF GOPILAL LADHA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.2741, 17TH CROSS 8TH ‘B’ MAIN ROAD, BSK II STAGE BENGALURU-560 070.
9. A. RAM CHANDRA REDDY SON OF LATE ANJAN REDDY AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.41, 1ST CROSS LINK ROAD, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU-560 003.
... ACCUSED (BY SRI:S.SHAKER SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR A7 AND A8; SRI:A.SAMPATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI: R.NATARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR A1 AND A2; SRI:S.SARAVANA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI:D.R.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR A3 TO A6;
SRI:RAGHU HULIKAL, ADVOCATE FOR A9; VIDE ORDER DATED 25.04.2018, A1, A2 AND A13 ARE DELETED VIDE ORDER DATED 31.10.2018, A6 IS DELETED) THESE CCCs ARE FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1976, READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED FOR HAVING DISOBEYED THE ORDERS OF THIS HON'BLE COURT PASSED ON 19.04.2013 IN CCC NO.280 OF 2011 (ANNEXURE-D) WHEREIN THIS HON'BLE COURT HAS DIRECTED THE ACCUSED TO DEPOSIT THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT RECEIVED WITH INTEREST AT 12% PER ANNUM BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT WITHIN ONE MONTH.
***** THESE CCCs COMING ON FOR HEARING BEFORE FRAMING OF CHARGES THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER These petitions are filed on the ground that the order dated 19.04.2013 passed in CCC Nos.280 and 291-293 of 2011 by the learned Division Bench, has been disobeyed. The said order is produced vide Annexure-D to the contempt petitions.
2. In terms whereof, respondent Nos.3 to 12 therein were directed to deposit the compensation amount received with interest @ 12% per annum before the Trial Court within one month and consequential orders. Since the same has not been done, the instant petitions are filed.
3. Notices was served on the accused. They have entered appearance.
4. The learned Counsel for the complainants submits that not only has the order been disobeyed, but the subsequent undertaking furnished by the accused has also not been complied with by the accused.
5. On considering the contentions, we are of the view that there are no grounds to proceed further in the matter. By the order dated 24.01.2017 passed in CCC Nos.280 and 291-293 of 2011, a detailed order was passed by the learned Division Bench. The order said to have been disobeyed, namely, the order dated 19.04.2013 and the subsequent order passed thereon were all taken into consideration by the learned Division Bench. Even the undertaking said to be relied upon by the complainants’ Counsel was also considered by the learned Division Bench. They also took into consideration the order passed on 02.09.2016 passed in Interlocutory Application Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 of 2014 and Interlocutory Application No.3 of 2015.
6. On considering all the contentions, the learned Division Bench held in para 10 as follows:
“As noticed above, the contempt petition was disposed of on 1.8.2012. On 19.04.2013, this Court directed accused Nos.3 to 12 to deposit the compensation amount received with interest at 12% p.a. before the trial Court within one month. However, on an application made by the accused, this Court on 2.9.2016 has observed that if there is any non- compliance or if there is any dispute in calculation, it would be open for the applicants in the contempt proceedings to resort to appropriate proceedings in law. This order has become final. If the complainants have any grievance in relation to non-compliance of the order dated 19.4.2013, they have to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. Therefore, no further orders are necessary in these proceedings.”
7. Therefore, the observations of the learned Division Bench therein is quite categorical. They have stated that if the complainants have any grievance in relation to non-compliance of the order dated 19.04.2013, they have to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. Therefore, no further orders were called for. The instant contempt petitions are filed on the ground that the very order has been disobeyed. Since the learned Division Bench in its order dated 24.01.2017 have categorically held that the complainants may file appropriate proceedings with regard to non-compliance of the order dated 19.04.2013, we do not think it appropriate to reconsider the very issue that has already been considered by the earlier Division Bench. Since the relief sought for herein has already been considered, we do not find it appropriate to entertain these petitions once again. Hence, the proceedings are dropped.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE *bgn/-