1 39cp372-11 rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURSIDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 372 OF 2011 Madhav Chandrakant Bhalerao .. Petitioner V/s. The Commissioner, Greater Bombay Municipal Corporation & Anr. .. Respondents ..... Mr. Yogesh Dabke for the petitioner. Mr. M. M. Malvankar for respondent No.1 – B.M.C. Mr. A. I. Patel, A.G.P. for respondent No.2. ..... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : DECEMBER 22, 2011. P.C.: Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Perused the orders dated 22nd June, 2011 and 26th July, 2011, passed by the Division Bench of this Court. There is no dispute that a decision was taken by the concerned Authority as per the first order and certain payment has been released. The contention of the petitioner is that the amount paid is not proper. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner makes a grievance on the basis of the communication dated 1st October, 2011 issued to the petitioner. He submitted that though the respondents agreed to pay the amount, the same has not been 2 39cp372-11 paid. It is obvious that the balance amount payable to the petitioner will have to be paid by the Respondent-Corporation. 3. If the balance amount is not paid within the period of eight weeks from today, it will be open for the petitioner to file a fresh Contempt Petition. 4. Suffice to say that at this stage no case is made out to proceed against the respondents. Subject to what is observed above, Contempt Petition is disposed of. (A.S.OKA, J.)