Karnataka High Court
CCC/210/2026 of SRI. RAMANNA @ RAMU, Vs SMT. VARSHA VODEYAR, on 23 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010116112026 NC: 2026:KHC:52535-DB CCC No. 210 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKAAT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.210 OF 2026 BETWEEN:
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKAAT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
AND
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.210 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
SRI. RAMANNA @ RAMU,
S/O LATE YELLAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT GANIGARAPALYA,
BSK 6TH STAGE, 100 FEET ROAD,
KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD,
BANGALORE – 560019.
…COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI. SYED MOHAMMED IRBAZ, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. VARUN JAYKUMAR PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SMT. VARSHA VODEYAR,
AGE NOT KNOWN,
THE TAHASILDAR,
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK,
OFFICE AT KANDAYA BHAVAN,
KEMPEGOWDA ROAD,
BANGALORE – 560 009.
…ACCUSED
2.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE – 560001.
…PROFORMA R2
(BY SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B.G, AGA FOR A1 & PROFORMA R2)
Digitally signed by
SUMATHY
KANNAN
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF
CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971, R/W ARTICLE 215 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO PUNISH THE ACCUSED
FOR
DISOBEYED
AND
NON-IMPLEMENTATION
OF
THE
JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 03.09.2025 PASSED IN
W.P.NO.26715/2025 (KLR-RES), IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
&
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
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 ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)
Learned counsel for the complainant states that the order of the writ court has been complied with and the order passed by the accused, copy of which is enclosed as Annexure-“R11” to the compliance affidavit, has already wbeen challenged by him in a writ petition.
HC-KAR
2. In view of the aforesaid, this contempt case is consigned.
Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE
Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE
KS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17