Bombay High CourtCP/182/2016dispossed offdismiss for default

M/S. Sanvijay Rolling And Engineering Ltd. Thr. Director Shri Ajay Agrawal v. Maharashtra State Electricity Distri. Company Ltd., Thr. Managing Director Shri Sanjeev Kumar (Ias)

2017-11-29Hon'Ble Shri Justice Z.A. Haq1 pages

1 cp182.16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO.182 OF 2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2275 OF 2011 (M/S. SANVIJAY ROLLING AND ENGINEERING LTD.....VS.. MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CO. LTD. & OTH..) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri T.D.Mandlekar, Advocate for Petitioner.

Shri S.V. Purohit, Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATED : NOVEMBER 29, 2017.

The learned advocate for the respondents has pointed out the affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents in which it is stated that the benefit as per the order issued by MSEDCL has been granted to the petitioner. The advocate for the petitioner does not dispute this fact and submits that the grievance of the petitioner made in the contempt petition does not survive.

In the above facts, in my view, the jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is not required to be invoked. The show cause notice issued to the respondent is dropped. The contempt petition is disposed. In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs. JUDGE RRaut..