1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.256 OF 2008 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.129 OF 2005 Mrs.Poonam Ankush Yadav ..Petitioner V/s Ankush Sadashiv Yadav ..Respondent Mr.S.A.Sawant, Advocate, for the appellant Mr.Uday P. Warunjikar, Advocate, for the respondent CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATE : 9TH JANUARY, 2009 P.C. . It is the case of the petitioner that access to the child Shivam has not been given as per the Order dated 26th August, 2005. By the said order, the access was to be given to the petitioner, who is the mother on every Saturday and Sunday. The learned counsel for the respondent disputes the said position and states that the access has in fact been given. More over, he further makes a statement from 2 now onwards access would be given in terms of the Order dated 26th August, 2005. In view of the said statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent there is now no warrant to proceed with the Contempt Petition. Accepting the said statement, the Contempt Petition is disposed of. The access to be given in the presence of the office bearer of the Advocates' Association of Pimpari-Chinchwad. The said office bearer to be nominated by the President of the Advocates' Association on this order being brought to his notice. The presence of the office bearer is acceptable to both the parties. 2. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent, this Court has not gone into the merits of the petition. (R.M.SAVANT, J.)