(-1-) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 221 OF 2004 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 221 OF 2004 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 221 OF 2004 Sadhana Sharad Galvankar & Anr ...Petitioners Versus Shirish Shirodkar & Ors. ...Respondents ..... Mr. D.D. Belosey, counsel for Petitioner ..... CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE, J. B. H. MARLAPALLE, J. B. H. MARLAPALLE, J. DATED: 14TH FEBRUARY, 2005 DATED: 14TH FEBRUARY, 2005 DATED: 14TH FEBRUARY, 2005 P. C.:- P. C.:- P. C.:- 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. After the Maharashtra State Co-operative Appellate Court decided appeal No. 137 of 2002 vide its judgment dated 5.3.2004, the respondent No.1 issued notice of attachment on 1.4.2004 and through an advocate’s notice dated 19.4.2004, the petitioners informed the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 that the notice of attachment was illegal and contrary to the decision of the lower appellate Court. It is alleged in this contempt petition that the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 have acted in breach of the order passed by the Maharashtra State Co-operative Appellate Court. 2. However, it is fairly conceded that vide communication dated 24.12.2004 addressed to Shri. (-2-) D.D. Belosey, the learned counsel for the present petitioners, the advocates for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 have informed that the notice of attachment was issued solely on account of certain communication gap between the head office of the State Co-operative Bank Ltd. and Recovery Officer. It has been further stated that vide letter dated 22.12.2004 addressed to the Secretary of the Society, the said notice of attachment has already been withdrawn. A copy of letter dated 24.12.2004 is taken on record. 3. Nothing further survives in this contempt petition at this stage and therefore, the same is disposed of as such.