The petition contends that the previous court order has been complied with. The Contempt Petition was disposed of accordingly. No substantive legal issues were adjudicated.
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} 43-CP-684-18
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 684 OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1394 OF 2017
Vankatesh S/o Narayan Yasamwar
...Petitioner
Versus
Ajit Kumbhar, Sub Divisional Officer, Kinwat Dist. Nanded.
...Respondent
Mr. S.M. Vibhute, Advocate for Petitioner Mr. S.S. Dande, AGP for Respondent/State
CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND MANISH PITALE, JJ.
DATE: 15th OCTOBER, 2018
ORAL ORDER :
The learned Counsel Mr. Vibhute, appearing for the Petitioner submits that the order passed by this Court is complied with. As such, Contempt Petition is disposed of accordingly.
( MANISH PITALE ) ( PRASANNA B. VARALE ) JUDGE JUDGE
mta
Vankatesh S/o Narayan Yasamwar
Ajit Kumbhar
Prasanpa B. Varale
Manish Pitale
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
