SRI. CHINNAGIRIYAPPA vs SHRI SATISH R
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57010-DB
CCC No. 391 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010224452026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE N.V.BHAVANI
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 391 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
SRI. CHINNAGIRIYAPPA
S/O THIMMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT NO.63, NELLAKADARANAHALLI,
NAGASANDRA POST, BENGALURU-560 073.
…COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI.SHARATH S. GOWDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI. SATISH R
S/O SHRI BASAVARAJU @ RAJANNA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
TH
R/AT NO.40/A, 8 A CROSS,
NEAR MUNESHWARA TEMPLE,
BALAJINAGAR, TIGALARATYPALYA,
PEENYA SMALL INDUSTRIES,
BENGALURU - 560 058.
2. SHRI. VINOD KUMAR.B,
S/O SHRI BASAVARAJU @ RAJANNA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
TH
R/AT NO.40/A, 8 A CROSS,
NEAR MUNESHWARA TEMPLE,
BALAJINAGAR, TIGALARATYPALYA,
PEENYA SMALL INDUSTRIES,
BENGALURU-560 058.
…ACCUSED
(BY SRI.ARAVIND M. NEGLUR, ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by K G
RENUKAMBA
Location:
High Court of
Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57010-DB
CCC No. 391 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010224452026
THIS CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE
215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF
THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, BY THE COMPLAINANT,
PRAYING TO HOLD THE ACCUSED PERSONS GUILTY OF CONTEMPT
OF COURT FOR WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE INTERIM ORDER
DATED 05.02.2026 AND FINAL ORDER DATED 05.03.2026 PASSED
BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.2950/2026(GM-POLICE) VIDE
ANNEXURES-A AND B AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO PUNISH THE
ACCUSED AUTHORITY WITH IMPRISONMENT OF SIX MONTHS IN
ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
THIS CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
and
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE N.V.BHAVANI
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)
Heard the learned counsel for the complainant and
learned counsel for the accused.
2. The accused are also present in-Court who have
been identified by the learned counsel for the accused. This
petition is filed alleging wilful disobedience of the interim order
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57010-DB
CCC No. 391 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010224452026
dated 05.02.2026 and the final order dated 05.03.2026 passed
by this Court in Writ Petition No.2950/2026.
3. The writ petition was filed by the accused. Learned
counsel has drawn attention of the Court to the oral interim
order passed on 05.02.2026 directing stay which reads as
follows:
“The records are perused including the
photographs in the light of the same. If the
petitioners are not parties to the proceedings and
it is seen that they are not, unless it is brought out
that they claim under one of those who are
defendants to the suit, the orders cannot be
implemented. Therefore, interim order is granted
as prayed for observing that any construction by
the petitioners shall be subject to further orders.”
4. It is submitted that the petitioners-accused were
claiming under the defendants and therefore, the order passed
by the trial Court on I.A. No.II filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1
and 2 of CPC in O.S.No.1407/2022 could be implemented and
the accused were bound by the same.
5. It is also submitted that in the final order dated
05.03.2026, this Court observed as follows:
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57010-DB
CCC No. 391 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010224452026
"7. Though the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners has vehemently contended that the
property purchased by the petitioners is entirely
distinct and separate from the suit schedule
property and therefore the interim injunction
granted in I.A. No.II as well as the direction issued
for police protection cannot be enforced against
the petitioners’ property, this Court is not
persuaded to accept the said contention at this
stage. The petitioners’ submission that the
injunction order produced as Annexure-F and the
consequential police protection are required to be
implemented only against the defendants in O.S.
No.1407/2022, and not against the petitioners,
cannot be accepted in the present proceedings,
particularly having regard to the fact that the
petitioners are tracing their title through the very
defendants who are parties to the suit.
8. Therefore, without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the rival claims, this Court
is of the prima facie view that the title documents
relied upon by the petitioners themselves disclose
that they are claiming title through defendants
Nos.1 to 4 in O.S.No.1407/2022. In that view of
the matter, the dispute relating to the identity of
the property, the rights claimed by the parties,
and the effect of the interim order of injunction
are all matters which fall within the domain of the
competent Civil Court where the suit is presently
pending. Since the issue is already seized of by
the Civil Court in O.S.No.1407/2022, it would be
appropriate for the petitioners to approach the
said Court and seek appropriate relief in
accordance with law. If the petitioners are
aggrieved by the order of injunction and the
consequential grant of police protection, it is open
to them to appear before the Trial Court, file
appropriate applications, and seek suitable orders
including modification, clarification, or
impleadment in the pending proceedings.
9. Though the petitioners have asserted that
they have substantially completed the construction
on the property purchased by them and have
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57010-DB
CCC No. 391 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010224452026
produced certain photographs in support of their
contention, the stage of construction and the
petitioners’ entitlement or right over the
constructed residential structure are matters
which necessarily require adjudication on facts and
evidence. Such disputed questions cannot be gone
into or conclusively determined in the present
proceedings under writ jurisdiction.
10. Accordingly, without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case and keeping all
the contentions of the parties open to be urged
before the competent Civil Court, the present
petition stands dismissed."
6. Learned counsel for the accused would contend that
the operative part of the order passed by the trial Court on
I.A. No.II restrained only the "defendants", from putting up any
construction over any portion of 'A' schedule property, pending
disposal of the suit.
7. It has been pointed out that the accused were not
the defendants in the suit. It has further been pointed out that
the interim prayer sought in the petition, that was granted in
the interim order dated 05.02.2026, reads as follows:
“WHEREFORE, the Petitioners pray that this
Hon’ble Court be pleased to:
Restrain the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 from
interfering with the peaceful possession and
enjoyment of The Petition Schedule Property by
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57010-DB
CCC No. 391 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010224452026
the Petitioners during the pendency of the Petition
in the interest of justice.
8. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 were the police authorities
in Writ Petition No.2950/2026.
9. It is emphasised by the learned counsel for the
complainant that the order could be implemented against the
petitioners-accused who were claiming under the defendants
and that was the intent and effect of the interim order passed
by this Court as well as the observation made in the final order
passed in Writ Petition No.2950/2026. Therefore, it is stated
that the contumacious conduct of the accused is established.
10. However, we are of the opinion that for
disobedience of an order granting temporary injunction by the
Civil Court, the process prescribed by Order 39 Rule 2A of the
CPC is to be adopted. Such being the case, it would be
appropriate for the complainant to resort to the provisions of
Order 39 Rule 2A CPC, rather than seeking action for wilful
disobedience of the order.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57010-DB
CCC No. 391 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010224452026
11. In view of the aforesaid, we consign this contempt
petition.
Sd/-
(JAYANT BANERJI)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(N.V.BHAVANI)
JUDGE
KG
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10