1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Contempt Petition No. 222/2008 (V.S. Parmar & others VERSUS E.M.K.S.S. (Ltd.) & others) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Masood Shareef, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Mahesh Rai, counsel for the respondent no.1. Shri S.P. Kshirsagar, counsel for the R-2 & 3. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : MARCH 19, 2009. By the instant petition, the petitioners seek action against the respondents for breach of the statement made by the counsel for the respondents before the Court on 16.04.2007 in Writ Petition No.135/2007 that the respondents would maintain status quo in respect of the allotment of plots in its layout. It appears from a perusal of the record that the petitioners were claiming a plot in the Ajni- Babulkheda Layout (Shrinagar Layout) from the respondents and a dispute under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act was filed before the Cooperative Court. The dispute was 2 decided in favour of the petitioners. The appeals filed by the respondents against the order passed by the Cooperative Court were also dismissed. The order passed by the Cooperative Court attained finality. During execution proceedings filed by the petitioners, certain objections were raised by the respondents and since the objections were decided against the respondents, Writ Petition No.135/2007 was filed by the respondents before this Court. This Court had in Writ Petition No.135/2007, granted a stay to the execution proceedings, by an ad-interim order. A civil application was moved by the petitioners for vacation of ad-interim relief. The petitioners also sought an order restraining the respondents from allotting the plots and from dealing with the plots in its layout until allotment was made to the petitioners by the respondents. This Court, in stead of deciding the application filed by the 3 petitioners, directed that the matter be fixed for final hearing on 15.06.2007. At that juncture, a statement was made by Shri S.P. Kshirsagar, the learned counsel for the respondents, that the respondents would maintain status quo in respect of the allotment of the plots and in its layout. It is the case of the petitioners in this contempt petition that the statement was made by the counsel for the respondents to this contempt petition in Writ Petition no.135/2007 for maintaining the status quo in respect of allotment of plots in the all its lay-outs and not only the Ajni-Babulkheda Layout. This fact was fortified, according to the learned counsel for the contempt petitioners, by the various applications filed by the respondents to this contempt petition for modification of the order dated 16.04.2007 in Writ Petition no.135/2007. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the statements of facts made in Civil Application No.3653/2008 in Writ 4 Petition no.135/2007 clearly reveal that the respondents sought a modification of the order dated 16.04.2007 on the belief that they were not allowed to transact the business of allotment of plots in the other layouts also. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in spite of the solemn statement made before the Court on 16.04.2007, the respondents had sold certain plots in Bahadura Layout to third parties. This, according to the petitioners, is clearly in breach of the solemn statement made by the counsel for the respondents to this petition in Writ Petition No.135/2007. I have perused the order dated 16.04.2007. It appears that a statement was made by the learned counsel for the respondents to this writ petition in Writ Petition no.135/2007 that the respondents herein will maintain status quo in respect of allotment of the plots in its layout. It is clear from a reading of the order dated 16.04.2007 5 that the statement was made in respect of the plots in Ajni-Babulkheda Layout (Srinagar Layout) and was not meant for maintaining status quo in respect of the allotment of plots in all the layouts, which were owned by the respondents. Merely because the respondents to this contempt petition have filed Civil Application No.3653/2008 and other civil applications for modification of the order dated 16.04.2007 it cannot be said that the oral undertaking/statement was made on behalf of the respondents to this petition in Writ Petition No.135/2007 in respect of allotment of the plots in all its layouts. In fact, the word layout is also used singularly in the order dated 16.04.2007. The petitioners had, before the Cooperative Court, claimed a plot in the Ajni-Babulkheda (Shrinagar Layout) only and, therefore, it appears that the statement was made by the respondents to this contempt petition that the respondents would 6 maintain status quo in respect of allotment of plots in the Ajni-Babulkheda (Shrinagar Layout). It is not the case of the petitioners that the respondents have either sold or have created third party interest in the plots in Ajni-Babulkheda (Shrinagar Layout) after the order dated 16.04.2007. It, therefore, cannot be said that the respondents have breached the undertaking/statement given on behalf of the respondents on 16.04.2007 in Writ Petition no.135/2007. In the result, the contempt proceedings against the respondents are hereby dropped. The notice dated 25.11.2008 stands discharged. The contempt petition is disposed of accordingly. JUDGE APTE