Mr. Hemant Shishikant Chitnis v. Mr. Manukumar Shrivastav

906-CP.31.2017+.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 31 OF 2017 M/s. Shriram Transport } and Sand Suppliers } Petitioner versus Mr. Manukumar Shrivastav } Respondent WITH CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 309 OF 2017 Mr. Avinash Mhaskuji } Kawade } Petitioner versus Mr. Manukumar Shrivastav } Respondent WITH CONTEMPT PETITION (ST) NO. 11232 OF 2017 Mr. Hemant Shashikant } Chitnis } Petitioner versus Mr. Manukumar Shrivastav } Respondent WITH CONTEMPT PETITION (ST) NO. 11236 OF 2017 WITH CONTEMPT PETITION (ST) NO. 11239 OF 2017 Mr. Santosh Bansi Yevale } Petitioner versus Mr. Manukumar Shrivastav } Respondent WITH CONTEMPT PETITION (ST) NO. 11242 OF 2017 Mr. Kisan Sudam Tambe } Petitioner versus Mr. Manukumar Shrivastav } Respondent J.V.Salunke,PA

906-CP.31.2017+.doc Mr. P. S. Dani-Senior Advocate with Mr.Sachin R. Pawar for the petitioner.

CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, JJ.

DATE :- FEBRUARY 21, 2018 P.C. :- 1.

After having heard Mr. Dani learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Samant-AGP appearing for the State, we have noticed that subsequent to the directions of the Division Bench, several orders have been passed and some of which may not have redressed the grievance of the petitioners completely.

2.

In the circumstances, we do not think that a case of civil contempt is made out. The remedy of the petitioner is to challenge the legality and validity of orders, which do not completely redress his grievance.

3.

The contempt petition is, therefore, disposed of with liberty as prayed.

(SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.) J.V.Salunke,PA