Savita Balasaheb Malgunde v. Shankar Bapu Malgunde

2024:BHC-AUG:10683 (1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 516 OF 2024 IN WP/1691/2022 SAVITA BALASAHEB MALGUNDE

VERSUS

SHANKAR BAPU MALGUNDE & ORS ...

Mr. K. N. Shermale, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. K. B. Jadhavar, AGP for Respondents-State. ...

CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.

DATED : 12th JUNE, 2024.

P.C.:- 1.

The petitioner approaches this Court seeking initiation of action against the respondent for committing contempt of this Court on account of intentional disobedience or disrespect of the order dated 04.02.2022 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.1691/2022.

2.

Mr. Shermale, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner vehemently submits that this Court has passed interim order in Writ Petition No.1691/2022 and stayed the operation and implementation of the order that was passed by the respondentauthorities. The order that was passed by the competent authorities under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 states as under:

"1जे नागरीक असलेले अर्जदार यांचा अर्ज मंजुर करयात येत असुन गांव दरी घेयात आलेली फेरफार न द .५२४३ र" क#न अर्जदार यांचे नांव अधिकार अभिलेखात पुर्ववत करावे. *करणी मे. दिवाणी -यायालय संगमनेर यां.याकडील *लंबीत रे.मु.नं. ६३४/२०२० .या अधिन राहून सदरचा आदेश देयात येत आहे. मौजे पिंपळगाव देपा या गावाचे विभाजन झालेले अस:याने गाव विभाजनानंतर सेट नंबर बदललेले अस:यास फेरफार . ५२४३ ला असलेले गट नंबर बदलले असतील तर <या सुधारीतगट नंबर वर तलाठी पिंपळगाव देपा यांनी अंमल >यावा.

(2)

2. मंडळ अधिकारी साकुर यांनी वाद मिळकतीचा ताबा अर्जदार यांना देयाची कार्यवाही पोलिस विभागा.या मदतीने करावी यासाठी आवAयक तो पोलिस बंदोबBत पोलीस निरिDक घारगांव पोलीस Bटेशन यांनी पुरवावा. पोलिस निरीDक घारगाव पोलिस Bटेशन यांनी कलम ११ मधील तरंतुदीनुसार फौजदारी * ीया संहिता, १९७३ .या *करण नऊ खालील कलम १२८ अ-वये आदेशाची अंमलबजावणी करावी. ३. सामनेवाला नं.१ संपत शंकर मलगुंडे व नं.२ सोपान शंकर मलगुंडे यांनी अर्जदारास *तीमाह रJम #पये २०००/- निर्वाह भKा Lहणून Mावा. असा आदेश आई वडीलांचा व जे नागरीकांचा निर्वाह व क:याण अधिनियम २००७ चे कलम ९ अंतर्गत देयात येत असुन सदरची रJम दरमहा पाच तारखे पुर्वी अर्जदारा.या बँक खा<यात जमा करयाची कार्यवाही सामनेवाला .१, २ यांनी दरमहा करावी. निर्वाह भKा अर्जदारास नियमीत मिळेल यासाठी पोलीस निरिDक घारगाव पोलिस Bटेशन यांनी सदर.या आदेशाची अंमलबजावणी फौजदारी *क्रिया संहिता १९७३ .या *करण नऊ खालील निर्वाह भKा आदेशाची अंमलबजावणी करावी <यानुसार अर्जदार यांचे बँक खा<यात दरमहा मासिक निर्वाह भRयाची रJम जमा झाली अथवा नाही याची खातरजमा करावी व रJम जमा न के:यास ता<काळ कायदेशीर कार्यवाही करावी.

४. आदेशातील मुMा .१ व २ ची अंमलबजावणी दिनांक १८/११/२०२१ पर्यंत Bथगीत ठेवयात यावी. या कालावधीत *तीवादUची इ.छा अस:यास अहमदनगर जि:हा अपील -यायाधीकरणाकडे अपील क# शकतील.

५. सदरचा निर्णय *.वादी यांना अवगत करणेत यावा." 3.

The aforesaid order was assailed in Writ Petition No.1691/2022, wherein the petitioner had prayed for grant of interim relief. This Court vide order dated 04.02.2022 granted interim relief, which states as under:

"In the meanwhile, there shall be ad-interim relief in terms prayer clause 'D', subject to condition that the petitioner shall pay monthly maintenance of Rs.2,000/- (Rs. Two Thousand only) to respondent no. 1 from the date of this order."

4.

Apparently, this Court stayed the effect of the order dated 18.10.2021 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer and Presiding Officer, Tribunal for Maintenance of the Senior Citizens. Perusal of the directions, which are stayed under the orders of this Court would depict that the effect of the impugned order was stayed, which directs restoration of mutation and possession of property in the name of the respondent.

(3) 5.

Mr. Shermale, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner invites attention of this Court to the Gift Deed executed by Shri. Shankar Bapu Malgunde i.e. respondent in this Contempt Petition in favour of Sopan Shankar Malgunde. He would also point out the description of the property mentioned therein and stipulation in Clause No.4, that the possession of the property is handed over in pursuance of the Gift Deed. Mr. Shermale would, therefore, contend that if respondent no.1 asserts transfer of the property and possession under Gift Deed, he has indulged in disobedience of stay orders of this Court.

6.

Having considered submissions advanced, it can be observed that the interim order passed by this Court is in the nature of the stay to the effect of impugned order and there is no prohibition or restrain against respondent-contemnor from alienating property. In absence of any such orders of this Court, there is nothing to attribute violation of the order or disobedience or disrespect to the order passed by this Court. Nothing is placed on record to indicate that after passing order dated 04.02.2022 respondent has been placed in possession or mutation is restored in favour of respondent no.1. Therefore, this Court is of considered opinion that no case is made out to initiate proceedings against respondent invoking provisions of Contempt of Court Act.

7.

In view of the above, Contempt Petition stands dismissed. 8.

Suffice it to say that the observations made above are only for the purpose of disposal of this petition without prejudice to the rights of the parties.

(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) JUDGE Devendra/June-2024