FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGBAD. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of | coram, appearance, court’s orders | Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders | CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 196/2009 Mr.P.B.Patil,Adv.for petitioner. Mr.S.V.Gangapurwala,Adv.for Respondent nos.1 to 3. .... CORAM : R.K.DESHPANDE,J. DATE : 12th NOVEMBER,2009. 1] It is the contention raised in the Contempt Petition that this Court has passed an order on 28/4/09 in Civil Application No. 12863/08 filed in Second Appeal No. 879/08 accepting the statement on behalf of the respondents that the status quo granted earlier in Writ Petition No.4334/07 shall be continued till hearing and final disposal of the Second Appeal. In W.P.No.4334/07 this Court passed an order on 16/1/2008 directing the parties to maintain status quo as on the date of the suit till the disposal of the appeal. It is the contention of Shri Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner that as a result of the order of status quo, the petitioner is in possession and he is to be continued in possession of the suit property. Shri S.V.Gangapurwala, learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 does not dispute this position that the learned C.J.J.D. Jamner by his order dated 28/3/2007 passed in R.C.S.No.29/06 has recorded a finding that the present petitioner is in possession of the suit property. 3] The complaint in this Contempt Petition is that inspite of such an order of status quo, the Tahsildar by Entry No.1742 dated 1/6/2009 has corrected the record. According to Shri S.V.Gangapurwala, this was done in view of the order of status quo passed by this Court in the aforesaid W.P.No.4334/07 on 16/1/2008. In view of the fact that the civil Court is ceased with the matter, it was not expected of the Tahsildar to carry out any corrections or alterations as the findings recorded by civil Court which are confirmed on the application for temporary injunction upto this Court about the possession of the petitioner towards the suit property. At any rate, the changes made by Tahsildar on 1/6/2009 vide Entry No.1742 shall not alter the position which emerges as a result of the orders passed by civil Court and in the Second Appeal which is pending before this Court. In view of this, I do not think that the matter is required to be prosecuted further. Contempt Petition is therefore, dismissed. (R.K.DESHPANDE, J.) umg/cp196-09