SMT. SUJATHA. C v. SRI. G. SRIDHAR
Court: High Court of Karnataka
Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Karnataka judgment dated 2020-12-21. SMT. SUJATHA. C v. SRI. G. SRIDHAR. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ST DATED THIS THE 21 DAY OF DECEMBER, 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY C. C. C. NO. 601 /2020 (CIVIL) BETWEEN Smt. Sujatha. C. W/o Abednigo Sunil Aged about 54 years Retd. First Division Assistant Union Christian College Siragate, Tumkur-572 106 Residing at Sukrupa TUDA Layout Siragate Tumkur-572 106 …. COMPLAINANT (BY Sri. R. Padmanabha, Advocate) AND: 1. Sri. G. Sridhar Prinicipal Secretary Department of Law & Parliamentary Affairs Vidhana Soudha Bengaluru-560 001. 2. Sri. Anilkumar Principal Secretary Department of Higher Education M. S. Building, Bangalore-560 001. 3. Smt. Manjula The Commissioner for Collegiate Education Palace Road Bangalore-560 001. 4. Smt. M. A. Neelavathi The Joint Director Regional Office Department of Collegiate Education Palace Road Bangalore-560 009. 5.
State of Karnataka Represented by its Principal Secretary Department of Higher Education M. S. Building Bangalore-560 001. ……ACCUSED (By Sri. M. Dhyan Chinnappa, AAG a/w Sri. B. V. Krishna, AGA for R1 to R5) This CCC is filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, R/w Article 215 of Constitution of India, by the complainant, wherein he prays that this Court be pleased to initiate contempt proceedings against the accused for having deliberately and willfully disobeyed the order passed by this Court in W. P. Nos. 6324-6349/2015 as per Annexure-A dated 27. 07. 2015 and punish the accused in accordance with law by allowing this contempt petition with exemplary costs and to pass appropriate suitable orders.
This CCC is coming on for Orders this day, through Video Conferencing, Chief Justice made the following: O R D E R The learned counsel appearing for the complainant states that the complainant has received five cheques in compliance with the order of which breach is alleged. He also states that the cost amount has not been paid. 2. As there is a substantial compliance, no action under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 needs to be taken in this petition. 3. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. However, for reporting compliance with the direction for payment of cost, the petition shall be listed on 07. 01. 2021 under the caption of “Orders”. Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE KNM/-
Source: High Court of Karnataka. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.