vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.250 OF 2008 CONTEMPT PETITION NO.250 OF 2008 CONTEMPT PETITION NO.250 OF 2008 Shri Kanhaiyalal Motilal Talera ... Petitioner V/s. Shri Dattatray K. Badhe & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.Madhav Jamdar for Petitioner CORAM: SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. DATED: JULY 24, 2008 JULY 24, 2008 JULY 24, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The petition has been filed contending that the respondents have violated the order dated 12.10.1995 restraining the respondents from alienating or disposing of the suit property or creating third party interest in the suit property till the disposal of the suit. It is contended that the respondents have appointed a constituted attorney and thereby have created third party interests. According to the learned advocate for the petitioner, the power of attorney given to Respondent No.7 creates a third party right in him and this is in breach of the orders passed. 2. In my view, there is no contempt made out against the respondents. Merely because a power of attorney is given by respondent Nos.1 to 6 in favour of Respondent No.7, it would not automatically mean that : 2 : third party rights are created in favour of Respondent No.7. Respondent No.7 can at best be an agent of the respondent Nos.1 to 6 and, therefore, there is no question of any contempt having been committed. 3. Contempt petition is therefore dismissed.