Inter-factum order in a contempt petition. The court found no willful disobedience of the order and disposed of the petition without reasons.
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.
954 sr. no..odt
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 212 OF 2014
SHEETAL@SAKUNTALA PRAVEEN NIWARE VERSUS PRAVEEN DEVIDASRAO NIWARE AND OTHERS
... Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Ravindra S. Shinde Advocate for Respondents. : Mr. S.B. Ghatol
CORAM : S.S. SHINDE & A.M. BADAR, JJ. DATE : 22nd JANUARY, 2015.
PER COURT:
1] Heard.
2] In our opinion, there is no willful disobedience of the order. As such, the Contempt Petition stands disposed of.
[A.M. BADAR] [S.S. SHINDE] JUDGE JUDGE.
grt/-
Sheetal@Sakuntala Praveen Niware
Praveen Devidasrao Niware
S.S. Shinde
A.M. Badar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
