1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Civil Application No. CAN 27/2009 (Mushtaq Jamil Shaikh VERSUS J.S. Saharia & others) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Vishal Anand, counsel for the applicant. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : APRIL 4, 2009. There is no reason whatsoever for condoning the delay of four years in filing the contempt petition. On a perusal of the contempt petition also, it is clear that the contempt proceedings cannot be initiated against the respondents on the allegations made in the petition. The civil application is, therefore, dismissed. C.P. ST. NO.4920/2009. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. By the petition, the petitioner seeks action against the respondents for having committed contempt of Court. The writ petition bearing No.488/2004 filed by the petitioner was dismissed and after the dismissal of the same, the petitioner had filed an original application, 2 before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, which was also dismissed and similar was the fate of a review application filed by the petitioner before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. The contempt petition is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE APTE