Bombay High CourtCP/303/2015dispossed offdismiss for default

Shri. Hiraji Natthurao Bangare v. Shri. Kawaduji Khobragade, Secretary, Dyan Prasarak Shikshan Mandal, Nimgaon

2018-01-24Hon'Ble Shri Justice Z.A. Haq2 pages

1 cp303.15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 303 OF 2015 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1060 OF 2015(P) ( HIRAJI NATTHURAO BANGARE...VS.. KAWADUJI KHOBRAGADE ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri P.N.Shende, Advocate for Petitioner.

Shri H.R.Gadhia, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Shri B.B.Raipure, Advocate for Respondent No.1A. CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATED : JANUARY 24, 2018.

Joint submissions dated 22nd January, 2018 signed by the petitioner, respondent No.1, respondent No.1-A and their advocates are filed. It is stated that the parties have amicably worked out the matter and the respondent No.1 has paid Rs.2,50,000/- and the respondent No.1-A has paid Rs.2,50,000/- by two separate demand drafts to the petitioner. It is stated that in view of the settlement the petitioner does not want to prosecute the proceedings further. The petitioner approached this Court by this contempt petition making grievance that the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 1060 of 2015 on 28th July, 2015 is not complied by the respondents, thought the order is maintained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. This Court was required to issue Rule and also Non-bailable Warrant against the respondent No.1-A. It is only after this Court has taken cognizance of this contempt petition, the respondents have worked out the matter with the petitioner.

2 cp303.15 Considering the facts of the case, though I find that the contempt proceedings are not required to be continued and the notice of contempt is required to be discharged, however, looking to the earlier conduct of the respondent No.1 and Respondent No.1-A, they are directed to deposit Rs.Two Thousand each with the High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Nagpur and produce receipt of it on record within one month.

The contempt petition is disposed accordingly. If receipt showing deposit of Rs.Two Thousand/- each with the High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee is produced on record within one month, the amount furnished for giving cash security shall be returned to the respective respondents.

JUDGE RRaut..