An application in contempt proceedings regarding compliance of an order was disposed of by the court finding that the alleged order had been complied with, leaving nothing to adjudicate further.
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 1803can70
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CIVIL APPLICATION (CAN) NO. 70 OF 2015 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 22 OF 2013 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 96 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION (WP) NO. 3874 OF 2008 (Rehana Begum Safdar .v. Mr. Mangal Meshram and others)
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders.
Shri A.M. Sudame, Advocate for the applicant/petitioner. Smt. M.S. Deshmukh, AGP for respondent No.1 Shri Alok Upasani, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. 18TH MARCH, 2016.
Heard.
The learned Counsel for the applicant/petitioner states that the order of which the contempt is alleged has already been complied with.
In view of the aforesaid submission, nothing survives in the matter.
Civil Application stands disposed of.
JUDGE JUDGE
*rrg.
Rehana Begum Safdar
Mr. Mangal Meshram
B.R. GAVAI
PRASANNA B. VARALE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
