In a contempt petition regarding a criminal revision application, the bench noted submissions that the impugned order had been complied with. Consequently, the court disposed of the pending contempt petition without admitting it for further proceedings.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 5 OF 2015
IN
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 27 OF 2013
SHRI. SURENDRA NAIK AND ANR., ... Petitioners Versus
MR. VALLA K. VARAK. ... Respondent
Mr. Carlos Alvares Ferreira, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. A. Dessai, Advocate for the respondent.
Coram:C. V. BHADANG, J.
Date:16th July, 2015
P.C.
Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
C. V. BHADANG, J.
EV
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition should be admitted or disposed of when the impugned order is alleged to have been complied with.
SHRI. SURENDRA NAIK AND ANR.
MR. VALLA K. VARAK
C. V. BHADANG
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
