The Court observed that the execution of its earlier directions in WP/7500/2013 has been complied with. Consequently, the pending contempt petition and related applications were disposed of with no further orders.
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.
35-CP-206-2017.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.206 OF 2017
IN WP/7500/2013 WITH CA/9142/2018 IN CP/206/2017
PRADEEP KALYANRAO THORAT AND OTHERS
VERSUS
NANDKUMAR AND OTHERS
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. S. R. Barlinge
AGP for Respondent – State : Mr. G. O. Wattamwar
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND
ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, JJ.
DATED : 10 APRIL 2023
PER COURT :
Learned advocate for the petitioners, on instructions submits that
the purpose for which the petition was filed regarding execution of the
directions of this Court has been duly complied with and stands sub-served.
Nothing survives. Contempt petition is disposed of.
2.Pending application is disposed of.
(ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.)
(MANGESH S. PATIL, J.)
Tandale/-
1/1
Pradeep Kalyanrao Thorat and Others
Nandkumar and Others
Mangesh S. Patil
Abhay S. Waghwase
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court