1 acd IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 360 OF 2003 Navin Velji Bouva @ Shah ..Petitioner. Vs. Commissioner, Thane Municipal Corporation & Anr. ..Respondents. ---- Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil, for the Petitioner. Ms. Anita Bhaktwani, for the Respondent No.2. ..... CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATE : 26 th APRIL, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard Shri Patil appearing on behalf of Petitioner and Ms. Bhaktwani appearing on behalf of Respondent No.2. Rest of the Respondents have been deleted by the Petitioner. 2. The Petitioner alleges that despite an Order of status-quo granted on 28.8.2003 in Writ Petition No.5527 of 2003 his structure was demolished by Respondent No.2 and when order is subsisting. 3. The photographs and complaint dated 22.10.2003 is relied upon. 4. On the other hand, Respondent No.2 has filed an affidavit and has stated very clearly that he has not done any act attributed in the Contempt Petition. The building was dilapidated. It was in dangerous 2 condition and the Corporation had issued Notices from time to time. He has stated on oath that it is the Corporation which came and demolished the structure. 5. From the affidavits filed by Respondent No.2 and the annexures thereto including letter of the Municipal Corporation, it is clear that the building was dilapidated. Portions of the same collapsed on 23.10.2003 and one part of the same was in hanging condition and protruding on the footpath. The Municipal Corporation cordoned off of the building and thereafter took further steps and removed the dangerous portion. 6. In such circumstances, the allegations in the Contempt Petition are not substaned and there is nothing on record to indicate that the Order of this Court was violated deliberately and willfully by the 2nd Respondent. The Contempt Petition is therefore misconceived and it is accordingly dismissed. No cots. (S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)