The High Court disposed of the contempt petition, ruling that it could not proceed after the impugned order was modified by a subsequent Division Bench judgment.
Contempt petition disposed of without costs.
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.
1
cp.215.13.26.sxw
kps
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.215 OF 2013
Balu Dhavlu Thakar. Deceased, through heir Barsabai Baban Shinde.
..Petitioner
-Versus-
Ganesh Patil and others. ..Respondents
...............
Mr.S.A.Sawant, for the Petitioner. Mr.Nitin Deshpande, AGP, for the Respondent/State.
CORAM : S. C. DHARMADHIKARI AND
G.S. PATEL, JJ.
Date : 16th September 2013.
P.C.:
1 The order of which the contempt is complained of has been modified on own showing of the parties and in that behalf our attention is invited to the judgment of the Division Bench dated 22.08.2013 in Civil Application No.209/2013 in Writ Petition No.263/2012. A copy of the said judgment is taken on record and marked “X” for identification. 2 If the Petitioner is not required to be given benefit of the earlier order of the Division Bench and that is clear from the subsequent judgment, then, we cannot pursue this civil contempt petition any further. The Contempt Petition is disposed of. No costs.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can proceed with the contempt petition after the impugned order was modified.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Division Bench dated 22.08.2013 in Civil Application No.209/2013 in Writ Petition No.263/2012Referred¶1
Balu Dhavlu Thakar through Barsabai Baban Shinde
Ganesh Patil
S. C. Dharwadhi
G. S. Patel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
