1 CP NO.187/2010. 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.187/2010. in SECOND APPEAL NO. 141 OF 2009. (Sattar Khan Jakabdarkhan Attar Vs. Bakhtiyar Khan Jabbar Khan and Anr.) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.AS Deshmukh, Adv. for petitioner; Mr.SV Chandole, Adv. h/for Mr. VG Sakolkar, Adv. for Respondent No.1; Mr.Shrikant Kawade, Adv.h/for Mr.SJ Salunke, Adv. for Resp.No. 4. *** CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL ,J. DATE : 16 th DECEMBER, 2010. ... 1) Heard both the learned Counsel. 2) By order dated 2nd March, 2009 in CA No. 2534/2009 in Second Appeal No.141/2009, the parties were directed to maintain status quo. It is alleged, in spite of there being such order, the respondent carried new construction at the site and thereby the nature of the property is changed. 3) The respondent came with a case that due to rains, the tin shed roof was damaged, resulting in percolation on the side of the walls. Consequently, he had removed the tin shed roof, got the walls 2 CP NO.187/2010. plastered and changed the tin shed roof to protect the walls of the room from heavy rain. This act of the respondent is certainly violating the very tenor of orders of status quo. Had there been an emergent situation, there was no injunction against the respondent to approach this court to get modification or necessary permission. Having not done so, under the guise of so-called heavy rains, he has removed or virtually erected tin shed, which was a matter of concern in itself. The case against the respondent revolves, that it is an encroachment on the road in spite of status quo order dated 3rd March, 2009. 4) Mr.Chandole, learned Counsel for respondent, informs that the respondent shall remove the tin shed roof, which he has changed, as referred in paragraph 3 of the affidavit in reply, within a week. 5) Needless to indicate, the Municipal Council, Jintur, irrespective of the orders of status quo referred above, if notice any illegalities committed either by the petitioner or the respondent, shall exercise its obligations and duties to set the things in motion. 6) Office to inform the Municipal Council accordingly. 7) Contempt Petition disposed of in the 3 CP NO.187/2010. aforesaid terms. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/