Shri Bharat R Gaikwad And Others v. Nitin Pawar And Another

CP 525-14-37

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.525 OF 2014 Shri Bharat R. Gaikwad and Others.

] ... Petitioners

Versus

Nitin Pawar and Another.

] ... Respondents Mr. Kishor S. Patil for Petitioners.

Mr. R. S. Apte, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Mahendra Agvekar i/b Mr. Mandar Limaye for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.

CORAM :- M. S. SONAK, J.

DATE :- MARCH 17, 2015 P. C. :- 1.

This petition alleges contempt of Order dated 15/03/2012 made by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Thane. Perusal of the Order dated 15/03/2012 would indicate that the Defendant Nos.1, 2, 3, 6 and 7 were directed to maintain status-quo till the next date. Admittedly, the Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC) was impleaded as Defendant No.5. As such, it cannot be said that the TMC has committed any contempt insofar as the Order dated 15/03/2012 is concerned.

2.

This Contempt Petition further alleges that by Orders dated 15/10/2012 and 02/11/2012 made in Writ Petition No.9303 of 2012, all the Respondents to the said petition, which admittedly included the TMC, were directed to maintain status-quo insofar as URS

CP 525-14-37 Petitioners' structures are concerned. The learned Advocate for Petitioners contends that by Order dated 02/04/2014, Executive Engineer of the TMC has directed vacation of the suit structure within a period of 48 hours. This, according to the learned Advocate for the Petitioners, constitutes contempt.

3.

The orders made in Writ Petition No.9303 of 2012 had directed status-quo insofar as structures of the Petitioners are concerned subject to the result of application for interim relief made by the Petitioners before the learned trial Judge. Admittedly, as of now, despite making of order dated 02/04/2014, no action as such was taken against the structures of the Petitioners. Accordingly, there is no reason to entertain the present Contempt Petition. It is clarified that the TMC shall maintain status-quo insofar as the structures of the Petitioners are concerned, until the application for interim relief is decided by the learned trial Judge. This is, of course, if the said application for interim relief has not yet been disposed of by now. 4.

In case the application for interim relief has been decided against the Petitioner, then the TMC, relying upon the Order dated 02/04/2014, can always take action as provided under the law. 5.

With the aforesaid observations, the present Contempt Petition is disposed of.

(M. S. SONAK, J.) URS