Bombay High Court

CONTEMPT 1074 of 1997 on 27 November 1997

Cites 0, Cited by 0

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 288 OF 2002

Pritamsingh Jagatsingh Lotey .. Petitioner

versus

Ravindrasingh Jagatsingh Lotey .. Respondents

...

None present for the petitioner.

Ms.Anita Bhaktwani for the respondents

CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE,J

DATED : 14th September 2005.

P.C.:

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

1. Civil Revision Application no.1074 of 1997

came to be decided by this Court on 27th November 1997 by recording the following undertaking by the respondent therein who is respondent no.1 in this Contempt Petition.

"Till hearing and final disposal of

this Civil Revision Application, the

respondent could not encumber and/or

disclose of the suit property being

CTS No.452, 451/1 and the building

known as Lotey Niwas at 25,

Collectors Colony, Chembur and will

not part the possession of the said

suit property or induct any third person therein during the pendency

of the suit."

2. In CRA no.1074 of 1997, Rule was issued on interim relief and the prayer for interim relief was disposed on the basis of the said undertaking. It has been contended in this petition that the said undertaking has been disobeyed wilfully by the respondent nos.1 and 2. It is further alleged that on 27th January 1999, the respondent no.1 deposited the documents concerning the suit plot with the Kapol Bank Ltd. In addition, it has been also alleged that respondent no.1 availed financial assistance from two Banks and states that this information was made known to him sometimes in February 2001. However, this Contempt Petition has been filed on or about 2nd April 2004. Undoubtedly, it is hit by limitations as set out in Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.

3. Contempt Petition is therefore dismissed.

B.H. MARLAPALLE, J

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead