In a contempt petition, the applicant abandoned the challenge after the respondent undertook to furnish required information within the day. The High Court of Bombay at Goa dismissed the petition and disposed of the matter.
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 mca85-11dt.2.8.19
Santosh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.11 OF 2019 IN
WRIT PETITION NO.761 OF 2018
Kashinath Jairam Shetye.….Applicant.
Versus
Bharat Nigalye.…. Respondent.
Petitioner in person.
Mr. D. J. Pangam, Advocate General with Mr. Shailesh Redkar, Addl.
Government Advocate for the Respondent.
Coram : M.S. Sonak &
Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ.
Date : 2nd August, 2019.
P.C. :
Heard Mr. Kashinath Shetye, the Petitioner in person and
Mr. D.J. Pangam, the learned Advocate General for the Respondent.
2.Mr. Pangam, the learned Advocate General states that the
information which the Respondent is required to furnish to the
Petitioner in terms of our order dated 9th January, 2019, will be
positively furnished to the Petitioner today itself, before 5.30 p.m.
This statement is accepted.
2 mca85-11dt.2.8.19
3.In view of the aforesaid, Mr. Shetye states that he is not
pressing this Contempt Petition. Accordingly, this Contempt
Petition is disposed of.
Prithviraj K. Chavan, J. M.S. Sonak, J.
Kashinath Jairam Shetye
Bharat Nigalye
M.S. Sonak
Prithviraj K. Chavan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court