Bombay High Court
CP/192/2019 of ABDUL AZAZ MEHTABSAHEB KHORIWALE AND OTHERS Vs PURUSHOTTAM MOHANLAL VYAS AND OTHERS on 8 October 2026
. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 909 CONT. PETITION NO. 192 OF 2019 IN LPA/304/2010 ABDUL AZAZ MEHTABSAHEB KHORIWALE AND OTHERS VERSUS PURUSHOTTAM MOHANLAL VYAS AND OTHERS ... Mr. Harshal Nandre h/f Deshmukh Rajendra S., Advocate for the Petitioner Ms. M.N.
909 cp 192-19 .
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
909 CONT. PETITION NO. 192 OF 2019
IN LPA/304/2010
ABDUL AZAZ MEHTABSAHEB KHORIWALE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
PURUSHOTTAM MOHANLAL VYAS AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Harshal Nandre h/f Deshmukh Rajendra S., Advocate for the Petitioner Ms. M.N. Ghanekar, AGP for Respondent-State Mr. Mukul Kulkarni h/f Mitkari Umesh G., Advocate for Respondent No.1
….
CORAM
:
SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.
Date
:
08/10/2026
PER COURT :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
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. Learned counsel for respondent No. 1 submits that the present petition may not be maintainable, as the earlier contempt petition, filed when the LPA was pending, was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 29/09/2025, observing that when the LPA itself was found to be not maintainable, there could not be any willful disobedience of the order which was in force by way of interim relief. He further submits that the present petition has been filed alleging disobedience of an order which was merely a stop-gap arrangement during the period for challenging the dismissal of the LPA by the present petitioners. He has placed on record the order dated 07/09/2021 passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, whereby the VS Maind/ Page|1 2026:BHC-AUG:47630-DB
909 cp 192-19 . dismissal of the LPA by this Court on the ground of non- maintainability is confirmed.
2. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, there cannot be any willful disobedience on the part of respondent No. 1 of the aforesaid order passed as a stop-gap arrangement. Accordingly, nothing survives in the present petition and the same stands disposed of [VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV] [SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE] JUDGE JUDGE VS Maind/ Page|2