1 (CP 43 of 2010) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 43 OF 2010 Mrs.Sudha Viren Vora ...Petitioner Vs. Tirupati Mahalaxmi Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. and Ors. ...Respondents ----- Mr.Vineet B. Naik i/b. M/s. Kiran Jain & Co. for Petitioner Mr.Satyajeet M. Mirajkar with Mr. Jokhim Raj i/b. Mr. Gabriel Pillai for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 Mr. M.M. Malvankar i/b. Mr. R.A. Malandkar for Respondent No.3 Mr.V.S. Mhaispurkar – AGP for Respondent No.4 ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 21ST FEBRUARY, 2011 P.C. 1. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submits that due to the subsequent events, he does not wish to press the contempt petition. It is, however, submitted that pursuant to the order passed by the City Civil Court dated 6th November, 2008 in Suit No.1406 of 2007, the Petitioner was depositing an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- per month. It is submitted 2 (CP 43 of 2010) that contention of the Petitioner is that he has allowed to put the hoardings during the intervening period from January, 2010 to 3rd May, 2010 and he is entitled to claim refund of the said amount and/or adjustment of the said amount. 2. The learned counsel for the Respondents, however, submits that the Petitioner is not entitled for refund. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that this issue may be kept open even if the contempt petition is not pressed. 4. Accordingly, the contempt petitions is disposed of as it is not pressed. It is, however, clarified that the issue whether the Petitioner is entitled for refund of the amount paid by him between January, 2010 and 3rd May, 2010 is kept open in L.D. Suit No. 87 of 2010. The contentions raised by the parties are also kept open. Writ petition is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE J.)