Karnataka High Court
CCC/361/2025 of SRI. SHIVANNA Vs SMT. HEMALATHA on 29 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010201862025 NC: 2026:KHC:54424-DB CCC No.361 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.BHARATH KUMAR CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.361 OF 2025 BETWEEN:
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.BHARATH KUMAR
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.361 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
SRI. SHIVANNA
S/O CHOWDEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
R/O: #250, SHAMBULINGESHWARA NILAYA,
THRIVENI NAGAR,
T.NARASIPURA TALUK - 571124,
NOW R/O: #543, 1ST FLOOR,
VINAYA MARGA, 9TH CROSS,
SIDDHARTHA LAYOUT,
MYSURU - 570011.
…COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI. PRITHVIRAJ SHASTRY, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. G. BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY., ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by
RAKSHA
Location:
high court
of karnataka
HC-KAR
AND:
SMT. HEMALATHA
W/O A. DEVARAJ,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/O: #2337, 9TH CROSS,
BASAVESHWARA ROAD,
K.R.MOHALLA, MYSURU - 570004.
…ACCUSED
(BY MS. S. AISHWARYA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. RAJESWARA P.N., ADVOCATE)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE
CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971 R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED HEREIN FOR HAVING
COMMITTED CONTEMPT OF COURT ORDER PASSED BY THIS
HON'BLE COURT DATED 24.07.2023 IN RFA NO.945/2021, IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.BHARATH KUMAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)
This contempt of Court case is filed alleging violation of the order dated 24.07.2023, passed in RFA.No.945/2021. The undertaking which was recorded by this Court on 24.07.2023 is to the effect that the respondent would not remove the trees standing in the property in question.
2. The learned counsel for the complainant would submit that the respondent has cut and removed the teakwood trees and that FIR has been registered in this regard.
3. A reply affidavit has been placed on record by the accused specifically stating that the accused has not removed any tree from the property in question and that the allegation of cutting down of 16 teakwood trees is expressly and specifically denied by the accused.
4. It is submitted that after the undertaking given on 24.07.2023, no trees have been cut, removed or sold. It is
HC-KAR
contended that on the eastern side of the Suit Schedule Property, there is a government nala and prior to 2014, 62 trees on the eastern side of the Suit Schedule Property abutting the nala had been removed. It is reiterated that after 24.07.2023, no trees have been cut, removed or sold by the accused. It is further stated that the complainant has not made out any case for initiation of contempt or violation of the undertaking given on 24.07.2023.
5. It is further submitted that the complainant has sold the property in violation of the status quo order passed on 10.02.2022 and that he cannot maintain this contempt of Court case.
6. Having considered the contentions advanced and in view of the affidavit filed by the accused, we are of the view that, the question whether there is any violation of the orders, can also be considered in the RFA.
7. In view of the uncontroverted contention that the property has been alienated by the complainant, we are of the
HC-KAR
opinion that nothing survives for consideration in this contempt of Court case.
8. Accordingly, the contempt of Court case is closed, leaving open for the parties to agitate their contentions before the appropriate Court.
Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE
Sd/- (K.S.BHARATH KUMAR) JUDGE
BK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24