Bombay High Court
Mohammad Naeem Mohammad Isaq vs Shri. Sunil Kendrekar Muncipal ... on 1 December, 2016
Bench: S.P. Deshmukh
1 CP-724.16.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 724 OF 2015
Mohammad Naeem s/o Mohammad Isaq ,
Age 53 years, occup. retired govt.servant
R/o Ajab Nagar, Tal. & Dist. Aurangabad .. Petitioner
versus
Shri Omprakash Bakoriya,
Municipal Commissioner,
The Aurangabad Municipal Corporation,
Aurangabad ig .. Respondent
----
Mr. Fayaz K. Patel, Advocate for petitioner
Mrs. Manjusha A. Deshpande, Advocate for respondent
CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 1st December, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT:
1. Heard Mr. Fayaz K. Patel learned counsel appearing for
the contempt petitioner and Mrs. Manjusha A. Deshpande,
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent.
2. While it appears that this court has in its' order order
dated 21-10-2015 passed in second appeal no. 546 of 2014
recorded submissions of appellant-present contempt
petitioner reading thus;
'' 6) The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that even
when the first appellate Court has granted decree of declaration
and injunction in favour of the plaintiff in the previous suit, due to
2 CP-724.16.doc
order of stay granted by this Court in Second Appeal No. 284 of
2002 the original defendant has done some mischief and he has
virtually closed the aforesaid western lane situated in City survey
No. 14248 and as that lane is in existence in city survey map and
apparently there is no other way to approach the property of the
plaintiff at present, something needs to be done in that regard.
Even the local body could not have approved the plan in favour of
defendant which would have closed that lane. It is open to the
present appellant plaintiff to approach to approach the local body
for removal of that construction and for opening the lane again.
The lane is to be as per the width shown in city survey map. Relief
of aforesaid nature is granted in the civil application filed by the
appellant. That application is disposed of. Authenticated copy be
given to both sides. Both the appeals will be heard together. '' ,
order had
the contempt petitioner purports to contend that after said
been passed there had been several
representations to respondent-corporation for removal of
construction, however, there is no response nor any action
pursuant to such representations has been taken. According
to learned counsel this, in his estimate, may amount to
contempt of court since there is underlying intention in the
order that the corporation would act upon representations.
3. The contempt petitioner has not produced on record,
copy either of the civil application or order passed thereon as
has been referred to in paragraph no. 6 of the order dated 21-
10-2015 reproduced hereinabove.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent Mrs. Deshpande,
however, submits that even going by the order as has been
3 CP-724.16.doc
passed in the second appeal which is referred to hereinbefore,
it would not appear that either there is express or even a tacit
instruction and much less directions to the corporation to act
according to the representation that would be filed.
5. Accordingly to learned counsel for the respondent, it is
only an opening that had been given to contempt petitioner to
approach the corporation. It is not a case that any mandatory
direction had been issued against the corporation. The
contempt petitioner may have other avenues open if he
considers that some action be taken pursuant to his
representations but, contempt petition would not lie.
6. I find quite some force in the submissions on behalf of
the respondent, taking into account order dated 21-10-2015
as has been passed in second appeal no. 546 of 2014 and
annexed to the contempt petition, alleging its contempt.
7. The contempt petition, as such, is not sustainable and
thus stands dismissed.
SUNIL P. DESHMUKH,
JUDGE
pnd
