IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.152 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO.442 OF 2005 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1985 OF 2005 Ramesh Tahilram Parwani ...Petitioner Versus Shri Krishna S.Vatsa & Anr. ...Respondents ...... Mr.G.S.Godbole i/b Mr.G.H.Keluskar for Petitioner. Mrs.S.S.Bhende, A.G.P. for Respondent No.2. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. JUNE 22, 2006. JUNE 22, 2006. JUNE 22, 2006. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The grievance in this Petition is about non-compliance of direction given by this Court to Respondent No.1 herein/original Respondent No.6 to dispose of Revision Applications filed by the Petitioner as well as Respondent No.9 within two months from the date of order dated 21st November 2005. Affidavit has been filed by Respondent No.1 : 2 : before this Court sworn on 21st June 2006 stating that the Revision Applications have been disposed of. The affidavit as filed, however, makes no specific reference to the fact that both the Revision Applications have been disposed of. 2. Learned A.G.P. on instructions of Respondent No.1 who is present in Court states on instructions that both the Revision Applications have been disposed of. That statement is accepted. Mr.Godbole for the Petitioner, however, submits that he may be given time to verify the position. There is no reason to doubt the correctness of the statement made by the Respondent No.1 on affidavit as well as in person in Court. In case, the statement is found to be inaccurate, it will be open for the Petitioner to revive this proceeding. The view taken by the Respondent No.1 while disposing of the Revision Applications, if is unacceptable to the Petitioner, it will be open to the Petitioner to pursue such remedy as may be permissible in law. 3. Petition disposed of on the above terms. : 3 : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.