1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO.4 OF 2004 IN C.P.NO.99/2002 IN AO NO. 1/1998. Chandrashekhar Govind Daiwatkar and anr. ..vs.. Ramdas Govind Daiwatkar and anr. =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- C ORAM : C.L.PANGARKAR, J. DATED : 5th December, 2009. 1. This contempt petition has been filed alleging breach of the orders passed by this court. 2. This court had passed an order in Contempt Petition No.99 of 2002 holding that respondent Ramdas had committed contempt of the court and in order to purge that contempt, certain directions were given by this court. It was also directed that if the directions as given by this court in order dated 3/7/2002 are not complied, respondent Ramdas shall be required to undergo an imprisonment as well as a fine of Rs.2000/-. When the said contempt once again came before the court on 26th August, 2002, the court found that the 2 order passed by this court on 3/7/2002 has been complied with and for the alleged breach the order with regard to payment of fine was confirmed by the court. It is, therefore, apparent that the court by order dated 26/8/2002 has already held that the order dated 3/7/2002 has been complied with and as far as breach is concerned, he was sentenced to pay fine of Rs.2000/-. In view of this, in fact, nothing survives in the contempt petition and that was in fact the end of the matter. This contempt has been filed thereafter in respect of the same order. I find that since the order has been complied and respondent has already been punished for the contempt, this contempt petition itself was not maintainable. It is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE. chute