Petitioners sought contempt for non-payment of interest. Court held the impugned order was complied with as the petitioner received the entire amount, thereby disposing of the petitions.
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
148.21CP
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
999 CONTEMPT PETITION NO.148 OF 2021
IN WRIT PETITION NO.15558 OF 2019
WITH
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.153 OF 2021
IN WRIT PETITION NO.15560 OF 2019
UMAKANT GOVINDRAO GADGUL
VERSUS
BALVEER RAMDAS RAMDASI
Advocate for the petitioners : Mr.L.H.Kawale h/f.
Mr.K.J.Suryawanshi
Advocate for Respondent : Mr.G.K.Naik-Thigale
CORAM : S.G.DIGE, J.
DATE : 21.09.2022
P.C. :
1]Heard the learned counsel for the contempt
petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent.
2]The learned counsel for the contempt
petitioners submits that the respondent has not paid interest
on the paid amount.
3]It is the contention of the learned counsel for
the respondent that this Court has directed the respondent
to pay interest only for the period of delay i.e. interest shall
have to be paid for the period for which the gratuity became
2
148.21CP
due and payable gratuity is actually paid. The said order is
complied.
4]I have heard both learned counsel. Perused the
request letter given by the contempt petitioner dated 6th
February, 2020. This letter shows that the petitioners have
received the entire amount as per the order of this Court,
hence, it shows that contemner has complied the order.
Hence, nothing remains in these contempt petitions.
5]Accordingly, contempt petitions are disposed of
accordingly.
[S.G.DIGE]
JUDGE
DDC
Umakant Govindrao Gadgul
Balveer Ramdas Ramdasi
S.G.DIGE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court