Contempt Petition No. 408 of 2004 · Appellate High Court · 2004
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Shri S.N.Gawde, AGP for respondents. CORAM : R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR, J DATED : 5th November, 2004 P.C.P.C.P.C.
#1. None present for the petitioner. Perused the records along with the application for contempt.
#2. The grievance of the petitioner is respondents complied 5th August, 2004 passed City Civil Court, Mumbai, in Notice Motion No.1718 2004 S.C.Suit No.1985
#2004. By order, respondent-MHADA directed pathway purpose 15’ plaintiff approach pathway access - 2 - Building No.5, Unnat Nagar No.1, Goregaon (West), Mumbai. The petitioner through advocate issued notice 30th August, 2004 compliance various directions order. Bare reading notice discloses directions consonance passed the City Civil Court. Being so, merely because directions issued notice complied with respondents, cannot respondents liable proceeded contempt Court. Besides, relation 5th August, 2004, non-compliance behalf respondents, certainly remedy available Rule 2A of Order 39 of Code Civil Procedure,
#1908. Being so, proceeding against respondents under Contempt of Courts Act. The petition is therefore rejected. -----
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 05 Nov 2004.
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.