Bombay High CourtCONP/34/2015disposed off

Mrs.Prabha P.Shenai v. M.Ramchandra Raju

2016-02-29Hon'Ble Shri Justice S.C. Gupte2 pages

21.conp.34.2015.doc dik

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 34 OF 2015 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 2110 OF 1996 Ms Prabha P. Shenai

...Petitioner

vs M. Ramchandra Raju

...Respondent.

.....

Dr Prakash Shenai CA of Petitioner in person. Mr G.J.Mohan, D.S.Mishra i/b D.S.Law Bureau for the Respondent. .....

CORAM : S.C. GUPTE, J.

FEBRUARY 29, 2016 P.C. :

This contempt petition alleges contempt of four orders, namely, order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 21 March 2007 in Notice of Motion No.1466 of 2005 and some other orders which are not annexed to the contempt petition. Anyway, it appears that these are orders in connection with directions issued to the Defendant to furnish security in the amount of Rs.10 Lacs to the satisfaction of the Prothonotary and Senior Master of this Court. An earlier Contempt Petition alleging failure to deposit the amount towards security was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, observing inter alia that the Defendant had already deposited a sum of Rs.10 Lacs as a security though not within the time limit specified in the order.

This order was carried by the Petitioner in appeal before the Division Bench, which dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. At that time, the Petitioner stated before the Court that the contempt petition had alleged breach not only of the order of 10 February 2010 but also of three other orders. After this was pointed out, the appeal court observed that if it were so, it would be open to the Petitioner to move a learned Single Judge of this Court for appropriate relief.

21.conp.34.2015.doc Petitioner has moved the present petition seeking to initiate action in contempt against the Respondent. The complaint in this petition is once again basically of non-deposit of the security amount of Rs.10 Lacs. The other orders, contempt of which is alleged in this petition, also refer to these very directions for deposit of security. In view of the order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 10 March 2014 in the earlier Contempt Petition and further order passed in the same contempt petition on 20 February 2015, there is no merit in the present contempt petition. The contempt petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

( S.C.GUPTE J. ) Pg 2 of 2