Contempt petition dismissed as infructuous because the order complained of has been complied with.
Contempt petition dismissed as infructuous.
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.
cp-226-15.doc
rpa 1/1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.226 OF 2015 IN WRIT PETITION NO.4121 OF 2013
Sushma Murlidhara Ghadge & Anr. .. Petitioners V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents
Mr.Samrat Shinde a/w. Mr. Ritesh V. Kulkarni, Mr. Tejas Deshmukh, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Vikas Mali, AGP for Respondent No.1–State. Mr. G.S. Hegde a/w. Ms. Juni Pandey i/b. M/s. A. Bhole and Co., Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 and 5.
CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR AND PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ.
DATED : DECEMBER 14, 2016.
P.C. :
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
submits that the order of which non compliance is complained of has been complied with. In the circumstances, Contempt Petition has rendered infructuous. Accordingly, the Contempt Petition is dismissed as infructuous.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) (SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.)
Sushma Murlidhara Ghadge & Anr.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Shantanu S. Kemkar
Prakash D. Naik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
