In this contempt petition, the court noted that the impugned order had been complied with. Consequently, the contempt petition was disposed of without a separate heads of argument, and the notice was discharged.
Contempt Petition disposed of; Notice discharged.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
cp88.11
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.88 OF 2011 IN
WRIT PETITION NO.6902 OF 2010
OfficeNotes,Office Court’s or Judge’s Orders
MemorandaofCoram,
appearances,Court’s
orders or directions and
Registrar’s orders.
Shri.V.A. Dhakne Advocate for Petitioner.
Shri.U.B. Bondar Advocate for Respondent.
....
CORAM: S.S. SHINDE, J.
DATE : 24TH JUNE, 2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the
parties. It is not in dispute that the
order of which disobedience is alleged in
this Contempt Petition, has been complied
with. In that view of the matter,
Contempt Petition stands disposed of.
Notice stands discharged.
[S.S. SHINDE, J.]
asb/JUNE11/cp88.11
Shri. V.A. Dhakne
Respondent
S.S. Shinde
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court