- 1 - IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION jmi CONTEMPT PETITION NO.164 OF 2000 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO.362 OF 2000. Smt.Sumitra D.Shah. ..Petitioner. vs. M/s.Gemini Steel Centre & Ors. ..Respondents. .... Mr.A.B.Dubey, i/b. N.N.Vaishnawa, for the Petitioner. Mr.H.V.Chande, for the Respondents. .... CORAM CORAM CORAM: S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 6TH FEBRUARY,2009 : 6TH FEBRUARY,2009 : 6TH FEBRUARY,2009. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . This petition is filed by the petitioners, alleging that the original defendant nos.1, 2 & 3 have committed contempt of the ad-interim order dated 16th February 2000 passed by this Court [Coram : D.K.Deshmukh,J.]. At the time when the said order was passed, the respondents were not present. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that by the said order dated 16th February 2000, the respondents were restrained by this Court from disposing of the partnership premises at Mahalaxmi Mansion, Room No.46/47, 3rd floor, K.M.Jhaveri Marg, Bhuleshwar, Mumbai-400 004. However, the same was disposed of by the respondents. - 2 - 3. The respondent no.1 is the partnership firm and the respondent nos. 2 & 3 are the partners. The respondent no.3 has now expired. Respondent no.2 has filed an affidavit-in-reply in which it is pointed out that the said premises at Mahalaxmi mansion never belonged to the partnership and that the said property was the personal property of respondent no.3. This fact is now also accepted by the petitioner. 4. In view thereof, the question of any contempt on the part of the respondents does not arise. The show cause notice issued to the respondents is hereby discharged. 5. Contempt petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs. [S.J.KATHAWALLA, [S.J.KATHAWALLA, [S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.] J.] J.]