IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 11 OF 2004 SHRI KETAN R.MAGANLAL AND 3 ORS., ....Petitioners Versus SHRI SANJIT RODRIGUES, THE ....Respondent COMMISSIONER, CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PANAJI, Mr. V. K. Bodke, advocate for the petitioners. Coram:- R. M. LODHA, J. Date:- 21st September, 2005 P.C. Heard the Mr. V. K. Bodke, the learned counsel for the petitioners. I perused the Judgment passed by the Division Bench in a group of Appeals being Letters Patent Appeal Nos.2/98, 3/98, 4/98, 5/98, 6/98 and 7/98 on 15th October, 1999. By issuance of fresh bills of tax it cannot be said tht the Judgment passed by the Division Bench on 15th October, 1999, has been deliberately and/or wilfully breached. No case for taking cognizance in contempt against the respondent under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is made out. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the bills of taxes which in the opinion of the petitioners are not in accordance with law, it is always open to them to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observation the contempt petition is rejected. R. M. LODHA, J. mc.