1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Letters Patent Appeal No.336 of 2007 In Contempt Petition No.184 of 2004 (D) In Writ Petition No.172 of 2004 (D) (Mohan Ajabrao Khapane v. Dr. Ramesh Chandra Sagar, Commissioner, Tribal Development and others) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Shri Anand Parchure, Advocate for Appellant. Shri A.M. Deshpande, AGP for R- 1 and 2. CORAM : A.P. Deshpande & R.C. Chavan, JJ. DATE : 10th January, 2008 This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against an order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the Contempt Petition. The respondents raise a preliminary objection about the maintainability of the appeal. The submission is that the Contempt of Courts Act is a complete code in itself and it provides for an appeal in a given situation under Section 19 of the Act. If in other contingencies no appeal is provided for, by necessary implication right of an appeal has been denied. As no appeal lies at the behest of a contempt petitioner on rejection of his contempt petition under Section 19 of the Act a remedy cannot be made available to such a party under a different statute. The present appeal has been filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent of the Bombay High Court. 2 The appeal is misconceived and thus rejected summarily. JUDGE JUDGE pdl