Dismissed

Atc Telecom Tower v. Mr. Suresh Kakani and Anr.

Bombay HC23 Aug 2019CP/629/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a contempt petition alleging violation of its order regarding telecom tower sites. The court held the petition misconceived because the respondents had a defence and the petitioner's advocate admitted sites were functioning.

What did the court decide?

The contempt petition was dismissed; the writ petition was placed for further hearing on 3rd September, 2019.

Atc Telecom Tower Vs Mr. Suresh Kakani and Anr. — Contempt of Court | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

1-CP.629.2014.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 629 OF 2014 IN

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 6294 OF 2014

¶5

ATC Telecom Tower Corporation } Private Limited } Petitioner versus Mr.Suresh Kakani and Anr. } Respondent

¶6

WITH

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 6294 OF 2014

¶8

ATC Telecom Tower Corporation } Private Limited } Petitioner versus Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation} and Ors. } Respondent

¶9

Mr.Amit Khairwar with Mr.Prasad Dhande i/b.M/s.D.H.Law Associates for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr.N.R.Bubna for respondent nos. 1 to 3.

¶11

Mr.B.V.Samant-AGP for State.

¶12

CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ. DATED :- AUGUST 23, 2019

¶13

P.C. :-

¶14

This contempt petition alleges contempt of this court’s order and which, according to the petitioner, was clear. This court, in the order passed, copy of which is at pages 18, 20 and 23 of the

¶15

paper book, according to the petitioner’s advocate, issued certain

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

J.V.SALUNKE,PS

¶18

1-CP.629.2014.doc

¶19

directions. Contrary to the same, the respondents have acted and thus, there is a violation and breach of the order and directions of this court.

¶20

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 defines “civil contempt” and that phrase is defined in section 2(b) to mean wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court. A contempt petition cannot be brought so as to force the opponent to obey the order when the opponent has a defence or answer for the same. In these circumstances, when the contempt action is brought, merely because in the opinion of the petitioner, there is a disobedience that by itself and without anything more will not enable us to proceed in contempt and hold the opponent or respondent guilty of civil contempt.

¶21

In these circumstance, the entire contempt petition is misconceived and it is dismissed. It is dismissed all the more because the petitioner’s advocate, on instructions, states that all the sites are functioning.

¶22

Place the writ petition on 3^rd September, 2019.

¶23

(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

¶24

Page 2 of 2

¶25

J.V.SALUNKE,PS

Atc Telecom Tower v. Mr. Suresh Kakani and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atc Telecom Tower v. Mr. Suresh Kakani and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Khalil Ahmed Mohd. Ali Hamdulay and 2 Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.

Balaram Ambo Jadhav and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra through Urban Development Dept. and Ors.

Akash Pramod Chavan Vs State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Tribal Devlopment Department and Ors.

Harsha Bihari Sajnani and 6 Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Shri. Ravindra Subhash Waghmode Vs Municipal Corporation for the City of Solapur and Ors.

Kum. Dipali D/O. Devrao Tiparse Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Tribal Development Dept. and Ors.