Dismissed

Choro Controls (India) Pvt.Ltd v. Severn Trent Water Prurification Inc. and Ors.

Bombay HC4 Apr 2005CRCP/1/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court found that a public notice published by respondents on a reserved matter was supported by affidavit records. It held that no action under the Contempt of Courts Act was a fit case and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The criminal contempt petition was dismissed; no action under the Contempt of Courts Act was taken against the respondents.

Choro Controls (India) Pvt.Ltd Vs Severn Trent Water… — Contempt of Court | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

 : 1 :

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

 CRIMINAL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.1 OF 2005
 IN
 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.553 OF 2004
 AND
 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2382 OF 2004
 IN

¶4

 SUIT NO.233 OF 2004

¶5

 Chloro Controls (I) Pvt.Ltd. ..Petitioners

¶6

 V/s.

¶7

 Severn Trent Water Purification Inc.& Ors..Respondent

¶8

 Mr.D.D. Madon i/b M/s.Bachubhai Munim & Co. for the
 Petitioners.

¶9

 Mr.Shyam Diwan i/b Mr.Shrawan Shah for Respondent
 Nos.1, 2 and 4.

¶10

CORAM : A.P. SHAH AND
S.J. VAZIFDAR, JJ.
DATED : 4TH APRIL, 2005.

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

 . We have heard the parties.

¶13

 2. By this Petition, the Petitioners are seeking

¶14

 to take action against the Respondents for criminal

¶15

 contempt. The only allegation is that Notice of
 Motion was heard by this Court on 6th and 7th
 December, 2004 and the orders were reserved.

¶16

 : 2 :

¶17

 Respondent Nos.1 to 4, however, published a public
 notice in Indian Express dated 18.12.2004 in spite of
 the fact that the matter was sub-judice and the order
 was reserved by the learned single Judge. On behalf
 of Respondent Nos.1 to 4, it is pointed out that what
 is stated in the Notice is based on the facts and the

¶18

 contents of the affidavit are fully supported by
 record. The learned single Judge has taken no action
 on this notice and having regard to the facts and
 circumstances of the case, we are of the view that
 this is not a fit case for taking action under the
 Contempt of Courts Act. Petition is dismissed.

Choro Controls (India) Pvt.Ltd v. Severn Trent Water Prurification Inc. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Choro Controls (India) Pvt.Ltd v. Severn Trent Water Prurification Inc. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kumar Plastics Co. Vs Nilesh Navinchandra Sayani

Aarohee Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd.

Vijayanand Vithalrao Mane Vs Kolhapur Municipal Corporation and Anr.

Shrijee India Exports Pvt.Ltd Vs Nilesh B.Sanghvi and Anr.

Shrjee India Exports Pvt.Ltd. Vs Bipinchandra H. Sanghvi and Anr.

M/S Shrije India Exports Pvt.Ltd Vs Bipinchandra H.Sanghvi and Anr.