THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.C.NO. 1659 OF 2010 Date of Judgment: 8.4.2011 Between: Navata Road Transport Regular Parcel Service …Petitioner and Srikanth Rathi and others ..Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.C.NO. 1659 OF 2010 ORDER: This contempt case is filed alleging violation of the orders of this Court dated 13.5.2009, particularly to the extent of the direction No.2 in the said order. For the sake of convenience, the operative portion of the directions in the said order are extracted below, “In view of the aforesaid, both the WPMPs are disposed of with the following order: 1. The second respondent shall pay the amount of Rs.1,32,03,976/- to the petitioners towards undisputed claim as soon as the petitioners complete the paper work and formalities necessary therefore. 2. As an interim arrangement, the goods of the petitioners, which are lying with the transporter shall remain with the transporter, subject to the petitioners paying the demurrage charges therefore directly the transporter.” Notice before admission was ordered and now the respondents 2 to 4 have filed a counter-affidavit. It is brought to the notice of this Court that subsequent to the aforesaid order dated 13.5.2009, the writ petitioners moved WPMP No. 23464 of 2009 seeking a direction to the respondents 5 and 6 (who are subsequently impleaded) not to return the goods pending writ petition. On the said application, this Court, by order dated 25.9.2009, directed the respondents 5 and 6 to maintain status quo as on that day so far as the return of the goods is concerned. In view of the aforesaid order, the direction No.2 in the order dated 13.5.2009 became inoperative. Even thereafter, a vacate stay petition being WVMP No. 458 of 2010 was filed by the 5th respondent seeking to vacate the status quo order, referred to above. The said vacate stay petition was heard by this Court on 31.12.2010 and the following order was passed, “None appears for the vacate stay petitioner. WPMP is, therefore, dismissed for non- prosecution.” The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the present contempt case on 16.11.2010 alleging that in spite of the undertaking of the writ petitioners that they would take return of the goods by paying demurrage charges, they are not coming forward to pay the said charges and take return of the goods, with the result the petitioner-transporter is continuing to hold the goods and has not received the demurrage charges for the period he is holding the goods. The learned counsel has also placed reliance upon the order of 31.12.2010, extracted above, which says that WPMP is dismissed for non- prosecution and contends that the very WPMP No. 23464 of 2009 stood dismissed and therefore the status quo order is not in operation and the direction No.2 in the order dated 13.5.2009 becomes operative. It would be evident from the above that on the day on which this contempt case was filed i.e., on 16.11.2010 alleging disobedience of the order dated 13.5.2009, the operative direction No.2 was superceded by the order of status quo passed by this Court on 25.9.2009 in WPMP No. 23464 of 2009 and in that view of the matter, it cannot be said that there is any disobedience with regard to the direction No.2 of the order dated 13.5.2009. The contempt case is, therefore, dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to move an appropriate application before the appropriate court for clarification or for further directions in accordance with law. _________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Dt. 8.4.2011 KR