Contempt Petition No. 126 of 2012 · High Court · 2012
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 126 OF 2012 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders Mr. N.V. Bandiwadekar for Petitioner. Mr. A.I. Patel, A.G.P. for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATED : 4th May 2012 P.C. :
Learned A.G.P. Appearing for the respondent no.1 states that the order has already been complied with and the delay was not intentional. Counsel for the petitioner also admits that the order has been complied with and does not dispute that the delay was not intentional. In view of this, the contempt
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.