Bombay High Court
S/642/1989 of KRISHNA MURATI MATHUR Vs MOIZ ABDUL HUSEIN PARDIWALA and ORS on 10 January 1994
THE HIGH COURT OF
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
O.O.C.J.
CONTEMPT NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1312 OF 1994
IN
SUIT NO. 642 OF 1989
....Plffs.
Krishna Murari Mathur ....Plffs.
vs.
vs.
.....Defnds.
Moiz A.H. Pardiwala and Ors. .....Defnds.
----------
Devarat Singh i/b. Thakore and Madgaonkar for the plaintiffs.
Devarat Singh i/b. Thakore and Madgaonkar for the plaintiffs.
Ashish Panicker i/b. M/s. Khaitan and Jayakar Ashish Panicker i/b. M/s. Khaitan and Jayakar for defendant no.1.
for defendant no.1.
CORAM: S.U. KAMDAR, J.
DATE : 22ND AUGUST 2005.
P.C. :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The present notice of motion is taken out for convicting the defendants for contempt of court fee non-disclosure of the sale of office premises situated at 1003, Dalamal House, Nariman Point, Bombay. The said premises was disposed off but the same was not disclosed in the affidavit in reply filed in the earlier Notice of Motion being Notice of Motion No. 853
of 1989. Consequently the Court Receiver was appointed as a Receiver in respect of the said flat. However on visit of the premises it was found that the premises had already been sold.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the
defendants makes a statement that to show his bonafide that there is no deliberate attempt to commit contempt of the court he is willing to deposit in this court a sum of Rs.59.00 lacs within a period of 8 weeks from today. The amount so deposited will be invested by the Prothonotary and Senior Master for a period of three years and renew the same from time tot time till further orders. He also tenders an affidavit submitting an unconditional apology.
3. In the light of the aforesaid position :3:
I am of the opinion that an action in contempt is not necessary. It is made clear that at the time of renewal of the said fixed deposit the interest accrued thereon also will be reinvested in the said fixed deposit. The said fixed deposit will abide the final result of the suit.
In the light of the aforesaid position I do not propose to take action in contempt and dismiss the motion for the same. No order as to costs.
sd/-
*******