Court held that since the impugned order was complied with after filing the contempt petition, the contempt stood purged and the petition was disposed of.
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 CP189.16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 189 OF 2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 9192 OF 2015
Janabai Bansi Kardile and others .. Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and others
.. Respondents
Shri D. R. Jayabhar, Advocate for Petitioners. Smt. A. V. Godhlekar, A. G. P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri Abhijit Choudhari h/f Shri D. J. Choudhari, Advocate for Respondent.
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND K. K. SONAWANE, JJ. DATE : 15TH JULY, 2016.
PER COURT :-
[ K. K. SONAWANE, J. ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ]
sam/July.16
Janabai Bansi Kardile and others
The State of Maharashtra and others
S. V. GANGAPURWALA
K. K. SONAWANE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
