SM 1 903.rpn.1.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION NO. 1 OF 2010 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 418 OF 2006 Surendra Nath Bagai ....Petitioner Versus Parviz F. Kaka and others ....Respondents ____________ S/Shri. M. S. Oberoi i/b. V. Y. Sanglikar for the Petitioner. Ms Ferzana Beharam Kamdin i/b M/s. FZB & Associates for the Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5. Ms V. M. Jhaveri for the Respondent No. 3. CORAM: J. H. BHATIA, J. DATED : 1 ST JULY, 2011. P.C.: Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. Perused the order dated 10 th January, 2008 in Contempt Petition No. 418 of 2006. The order shows that the learned Counsel for the parties had made a statement that the watter supply is duly restored to the Petitioner and no further steps would be required to be taken. In these circumstances, Contempt Petition was disposed off. Therefore, I do not see any valid reason to review that order. Revision Petition stands dismissed. (J. H. BHATIA, J.)