Bombay High CourtCP/267/2013dispossed offdismiss for default

Vinayk Tukaramji Belgamvar, v. Mr. Vasantrao Ingole, Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Pusad Dist. Yeotmal

2016-03-23Hon'Ble Smt. Justice V.A. Naik,Hon'Ble Shri Justice V.M. Deshpande2 pages

CP267-13 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 267/2013 IN W.P. NO.2788/1994 (D) (VINAYAK TUKARAMJI BELGAMWAR VERSUS VASANTRAO INGOLE, CHIEF OFFICER, MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, PUSAD, DISTRICT YAVATMAL) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Anand Parchure, counsel for the petitioner. Shri N.L. Jaiswal, counsel for the respondent. CORAM : SMT.VASANTI A. NAIK AND V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATE : MARCH 23 , 2016.

By this contempt petition, the petitioner seeks an action against the respondent for willful disobedience of the order dated 15.11.2010 in Writ Petition No.2788 of 1994. It is stated on behalf of the respondent that the amount due and payable to the petitioner, as per the respondent, is paid. It is, however, stated that there appears to be some dispute in regard to a small amount. It is stated that according to the petitioner some amount is liable to be paid whereas, according to the respondent, it is not liable to be paid. It is stated that the respondent and the petitioner are, however, sorting out the matter in that regard.

The learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that the major part of the amount that was directed to be paid by the order of which the contempt is alleged, is received by the petitioner. It is admitted that the parties are working out on the dispute in regard to the minor amount. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not have any serious objection if the contempt petition is disposed of in view of the aforesaid.

CP267-13 Hence, in view of the statements recorded hereinabove, we dispose of the contempt petition with no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE APTE