Bombay High Court
CP/708/2026 of UTTAM KRUSHNA KAMBLE DIED THROUGH LRS 1A SAJUBAI UTTAM KAMBLE AND OTHERS Vs GOVIND YERME AND OTHERS on 14 October 2026
OF 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 915 CONT. PETITION NO. 708 OF 2026 IN SA/260/2015 UTTAM KRUSHNA KAMBLE DIED THROUGH LRS 1A SAJUBAI UTTAM KAMBLE AND OTHERS VERSUS GOVIND YERME AND OTHERS ... Mr. P. V. Barde, Advocate for the Petitioners … CORAM : AJIT B.
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.
915 CP 708 OF 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 915 CONT. PETITION NO. 708 OF 2026 IN SA/260/2015 UTTAM KRUSHNA KAMBLE DIED THROUGH LRS 1A SAJUBAI UTTAM KAMBLE AND OTHERS VERSUS GOVIND YERME AND OTHERS ... Mr. P. V. Barde, Advocate for the Petitioners … CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. DATED : 14th October 2026 P.C. :- . Mr. P. V. Barde, learned Advocate for the petitioners come up with this Contempt Petition contending that the Tahsildar, Omerga has acted in violation of clause (iii) of paragraph No.16 of the order dated 11.03.2016 passed by this Court.
2. He submits that the Tahsildar, Omerga while executing Regular Darkhast No.12 of 2012 passed an order dated 01.01.2026 in violation of the findings and directions issued by this Court. Thus, he prays to issue contempt notice against the concerned Tahsildar, Omerga. 2026:BHC-AUG:49351
915 CP 708 OF 2026
3. With the assistance of Mr. Barde, learned Advocate for the petitioners, I have gone through the text of the order dated 01.01.2026 passed by the Tahsildar, Omerga. In operative clause (iii) of the said order, the Tahsildar, Omerga has clearly observed that suitable procedure/action be taken in respect of the land purchased by defendant Nos.4 and 5 as per the directions/decision of the High Court.
4. In view of this, I do not find that the Tahsildar has committed any contempt of this Court. No case is made out to issue contempt notice to the respondents.
5. The Contempt Petition stands dismissed. ( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. ) PRW