Shaikh Nawab Shaikh Bashir Qureshi v. G.D.Kolekar, Police Inspector And Others

1 CP433.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.433 OF 2014 IN REGULAR CIVIL SUIT NO.1786 OF 2012 Shaikh Nawab s/o. Shaikh Bashir Qurehi, age 45 years, occ.

Business, r/o. Shillekhana, Tq.

and Dist.Aurangabad :

..Petitioner V E R S U S G.D.Kolekar, Police Inspector, Kranti Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad Niraman Bharti Land Mark Pvt.

Ltd., through it's Director - Ranjeet s/o. Ashok Darakh, age 40 years, occ.Business, r/o.

Above Ashok Restaurant, Nirala Bazar, Aurangabad Nasher Khan s/o. Abddul Rahim Khan, age 54 years, occ.

Business, r/o. In front of Moon Light Hotel, Nutan Colony, Aurangabad :

Respondents Mr.R.D.Biradar, advocate for petitioner CORAM : M.T. JOSHI, J.

ORDER RESERVED ON : JANUARY 28, 2015 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON : FEBRUARY 11, 2015 PER COURT :

Heard.

2 CP433.odt 2] Perused the written notes of arguments.

3] The present petitioner filed a suit for perpetual injunction for restraining the respondent nos.2 and 3 from disturbing the peaceful possession of the petitioner in the suit property and further not to make any construction over the same.

4] Learned 15th Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Aurangabad granted ex-parte temporary injunction in the application for interim relief on the same lines. It appears that said application could not be heard on merit and present petitioner has filed an application for continuation of the "statusquo" until further orders and that was granted by the learned Judge.

5] In the present petition for taking action

3 CP433.odt against the respondents under the Contempt of Court's Act, it is alleged that as respondent nos.2 and 3 were going to make construction on the said property, son of the present petitioner had filed a complaint before the police authority on 10th June, 2014. Despite this, respondent no.1 - G.D.Kolekar, Police Inspector, has issued notice under Section 149 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 7th July, 2014 to the petitioner and his son. In the circumstance, it is submitted that the respondents be punished for contempt of the Court's order.

6] When this Court has raised an issue as to how, this petition would be maintenable in view of the specific provisions of the Order XXXIX Rule 2-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, whereunder, an application for taking action for breach of the injunction order can be filed, learned counsel submits that in view of the provisions of Section

4 CP433.odt 10 of the Contempt of Court's Act, present petition is maintainable. He relied upon the ratio in the cases of Kalyaneshwari Vs. Union of India and ors., (2012) 12 SCC 599 and N. Venkata Swamy Naidu Vs. M/s. Sri Sri Surya Teja Constructions Pvt. Ltd. and ors, 2008 Cri. L.J. 227.

7] Reading of the ratio of these authorities would show that present issue was not involved in those cases. When an independent machinery for dealing with the grievance is already provided for by the Code of Civil Procedure and when there is no special circumstance to take any suo-motu action in the matter, present petition would not be maintainable.

8] The Contempt Petition is, therefore, rejected. [M.T. JOSHI, J.]

5 CP433.odt kbp