Petitioners filed a writ contempt petition. Counsel submitted that compliance with the prior contempt order was made during pendency. The court held the matter required no adjudication and dismissed the petition as infructuous.
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.
[2023:RJ-JD:39052]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Writ Contempt No. 665/2018
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. Himanshu Shrimali. |
|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) | : -- |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
09/11/2023
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during pendency of the present contempt petition, necessary compliance of the order under contempt has been made by the respondents.
In view of the above, nothing remains to be adjudicated upon in the present contempt petition.
(2 of 2) [WCP-665/2018]
[2023:RJ-JD:39052]
Accordingly, the present Writ Contempt Petition is dismissed
as having been rendered infructuous.
Rule is discharged.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
380-prashant/-
Usha Rani Sharma
Leela Devi
Bhagwati Gehlot
N.C. Goyal
Kuldeep Mathur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
