1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 25 OF 2004 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 25 OF 2004 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 25 OF 2004 IN IN IN SUIT NO. 4273 OF 1995 SUIT NO. 4273 OF 1995 SUIT NO. 4273 OF 1995 1(a) Valerian Peter Rodriques & Ors. ..Petitioners 1(a) Valerian Peter Rodriques & Ors. ..Petitioners 1(a) Valerian Peter Rodriques & Ors. ..Petitioners Versus Versus Versus Larry Joseph Durate & Anr. .. Respondents Larry Joseph Durate & Anr. .. Respondents Larry Joseph Durate & Anr. .. Respondents Mr. A.V.Kshirsagar for the petitioners. Mr. A.V.Kshirsagar for the petitioners. Mr. A.V.Kshirsagar for the petitioners. Mr.S.D.Mogre for Respondents. Mr.S.D.Mogre for Respondents. Mr.S.D.Mogre for Respondents. CORAM CORAM CORAM: S.K.SHAH,J. S.K.SHAH,J. S.K.SHAH,J. DATE DATE DATE : 19th November,2005. 19th November,2005. 19th November,2005. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. By Order dated 20th December, 1995, the 1. By Order dated 20th December, 1995, the 1. By Order dated 20th December, 1995, the Defendants i.e. Respondents herein were restrained by Defendants i.e. Respondents herein were restrained by Defendants i.e. Respondents herein were restrained by an injunction from parting with possession of the suit an injunction from parting with possession of the suit an injunction from parting with possession of the suit premises or any part thereof or creating any third premises or any part thereof or creating any third premises or any part thereof or creating any third party rights therein or inducting anyone else in the party rights therein or inducting anyone else in the party rights therein or inducting anyone else in the suit premises. This Contempt Petition is filed on the suit premises. This Contempt Petition is filed on the suit premises. This Contempt Petition is filed on the allegation that the Respondents have parted with allegation that the Respondents have parted with allegation that the Respondents have parted with possession of the premises by inducting a tenant. possession of the premises by inducting a tenant. possession of the premises by inducting a tenant. 2 2. The Respondent no.1 has filed an affidavit 2. The Respondent no.1 has filed an affidavit 2. The Respondent no.1 has filed an affidavit admitting the fact that the tenant had been inducted admitting the fact that the tenant had been inducted admitting the fact that the tenant had been inducted subsequent to the order passed by this Court. He subsequent to the order passed by this Court. He subsequent to the order passed by this Court. He apologised for the same. In the affidavit, he has apologised for the same. In the affidavit, he has apologised for the same. In the affidavit, he has however, given explanation of he being under the wrong however, given explanation of he being under the wrong however, given explanation of he being under the wrong impression that there was no injunction in respect of impression that there was no injunction in respect of impression that there was no injunction in respect of the suit premises. The petitioner had filed the suit the suit premises. The petitioner had filed the suit the suit premises. The petitioner had filed the suit in the City Civil Court, being S.C.Suit No.1782 of in the City Civil Court, being S.C.Suit No.1782 of in the City Civil Court, being S.C.Suit No.1782 of 1993 wherein interim injunction was granted. The said 1993 wherein interim injunction was granted. The said 1993 wherein interim injunction was granted. The said suit came to be dismissed on 18.11.1997. The suit came to be dismissed on 18.11.1997. The suit came to be dismissed on 18.11.1997. The Respondent No.1 submits in the affidavit that as a Respondent No.1 submits in the affidavit that as a Respondent No.1 submits in the affidavit that as a result of the dismissal of the suit and the injunction result of the dismissal of the suit and the injunction result of the dismissal of the suit and the injunction order passed in that suit having expired, he thought order passed in that suit having expired, he thought order passed in that suit having expired, he thought that he was free to lease the suit premises. It was that he was free to lease the suit premises. It was that he was free to lease the suit premises. It was his prima facie mistake. his prima facie mistake. his prima facie mistake. 3. It is important to note that immediately after 3. It is important to note that immediately after 3. It is important to note that immediately after the notice is issued in Contempt Petition, the the notice is issued in Contempt Petition, the the notice is issued in Contempt Petition, the Respondent No.1 got the suit premises vacated and it Respondent No.1 got the suit premises vacated and it Respondent No.1 got the suit premises vacated and it is now in possession of the Respondent No.1. This has is now in possession of the Respondent No.1. This has is now in possession of the Respondent No.1. This has been admitted by the learned Counsel for the been admitted by the learned Counsel for the been admitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners is the correct position. The learned petitioners is the correct position. The learned petitioners is the correct position. The learned Counsel for the petitioners also requests that lenient Counsel for the petitioners also requests that lenient Counsel for the petitioners also requests that lenient view be taken in the matter. The apology is accepted view be taken in the matter. The apology is accepted view be taken in the matter. The apology is accepted though the explanation given is not acceptable. though the explanation given is not acceptable. though the explanation given is not acceptable. 4. In view of the fact that the Respondent No.1 has 4. In view of the fact that the Respondent No.1 has 4. In view of the fact that the Respondent No.1 has 3 now taken back possession of the premises, I do not now taken back possession of the premises, I do not now taken back possession of the premises, I do not find that it would be just to take any action against find that it would be just to take any action against find that it would be just to take any action against the Respondent No.1 and it is sufficient in the the Respondent No.1 and it is sufficient in the the Respondent No.1 and it is sufficient in the interest of justice to accept the unconditional interest of justice to accept the unconditional interest of justice to accept the unconditional apology tendered by the Respondent No.1. apology tendered by the Respondent No.1. apology tendered by the Respondent No.1. 5. It however appears that the electric meter 5. It however appears that the electric meter 5. It however appears that the electric meter installed in the suit premises continues to stand in installed in the suit premises continues to stand in installed in the suit premises continues to stand in the name of the person in whose favour the lease was the name of the person in whose favour the lease was the name of the person in whose favour the lease was created. On the last occasion, the learned Counsel created. On the last occasion, the learned Counsel created. On the last occasion, the learned Counsel for the Respondents had already undertaken to change for the Respondents had already undertaken to change for the Respondents had already undertaken to change the name of the meter. He however submits that the the name of the meter. He however submits that the the name of the meter. He however submits that the meter could not be changed although the application meter could not be changed although the application meter could not be changed although the application for change of the name of the meter is pending with for change of the name of the meter is pending with for change of the name of the meter is pending with the concerned authorities. The Respondent No.1 shall the concerned authorities. The Respondent No.1 shall the concerned authorities. The Respondent No.1 shall get the meter changed in his name within six months get the meter changed in his name within six months get the meter changed in his name within six months from today and if that is not possible, get the meter from today and if that is not possible, get the meter from today and if that is not possible, get the meter cancelled. cancelled. cancelled. 6. Liberty to the petitioners to move this Court if 6. Liberty to the petitioners to move this Court if 6. Liberty to the petitioners to move this Court if the change of name of the meter or cancellation of the the change of name of the meter or cancellation of the the change of name of the meter or cancellation of the meter is not done by the Respondent No.1. meter is not done by the Respondent No.1. meter is not done by the Respondent No.1. 7. The Show Cause Notice No.725 of 2004 stands 7. The Show Cause Notice No.725 of 2004 stands 7. The Show Cause Notice No.725 of 2004 stands discharged. discharged. discharged. Contempt Petition stands disposed of. Contempt Petition stands disposed of. Contempt Petition stands disposed of. 4 ---- ---- ---- (S.K.SHAH,J.) (S.K.SHAH,J.) (S.K.SHAH,J.)