( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 137 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4679 OF 2008 Shamlal Manikchand Nathani and ors. .. Petitioners Versus Shankar Shamlal Nathani and ors. .. Respondents Shri V.B. Patil, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri P.R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mrs. R.K. Ladda, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 3 and 4. CORAM : P.R. BORKAR,J. DATED : 29.09.2009 P.C. :- 1. Heard Shri V.B. Patil, Advocate for the petitioners, Shri P.R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate for respondent No.1 and Mrs. R.K. Ladda, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 3 and 4. 2. Brief facts averred by the petitioners, which according to him amounted to the contempt, may be stated as below:- ( 2 ) . The petitioners are defendants in Regular Civil Suit No. 282 of 2007 filed by respondent No.1 against them. In that suit application Exh.6 was given for temporary injunction. The same came to be dismissed by II Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon, by his order dated 12.12.2007. As against the same, Misc. Civil Appeal No. 10 of 2008 is filed in the District Court, Jalgaon. The Adhoc District Judge-1, decided said Misc. Civil Appeal on 26.06.2008 and allowed the appeal and issued injunction against present appellants. As against the same, present petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 4679 of 2008 and this Court by order dated 06.08.2008 pleased to stay the order passed by the Adhoc District Judge-1, Jalgaon, on 26.06.2008, whereby injunction was granted against the appellants. No other relief is granted, though as per copy of the writ petition on record, present contempt petitioners have sought injunction against respondent No.1 restraining him from interfering in their possession. 3. According to present contempt petitioners, respondent No.1 made application to respondent No.3 and on ( 3 ) the basis of that respondent No.4 has initiated proceedings under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C. and thus it is said that the contempt is committed under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. “Civil Contempt” is defined under Section 2 (b) of the Act, as under :- "2 (b) 'civil contempt' means wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a Court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a Court;" 4. In this case, there is no order passed in favour of the appellant. Only order of injunction passed by the Adhoc District Judge-1, Jalgaon, in M.C.A. No. 10 of 2008 was stayed by this Court by its order dated 06.08.2008. This Court did not grant prayer clause "D" of the writ petition, which is as follows:- "D) Pending hearing and final disposal of this Writ Petition may pleased kindly protect the possession of the petitioner No.1 in Shop No. 101 situated in Central Fule Market, Jalgaon and the business run in the said shop in the named and styled as Maharashtra Dresses run by petitioner No.2." (sic) 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, if respondent No.1 has made application to respondent No.3, as per Exh. "B" and "C" respectively dated 02.12.2008 and ( 4 ) 12.12.2008, for protecting his possession and if respondent No.3 filed proceedings before respondent No.4, the Sub- Divisional Officer, as per Section 145 of the Cr.P.C. and if respondent No.4 has issued notice to the appellant and respondent No.1, it cannot be said that there is any breach of order of this Court. The order of stay cannot be construed as if it is an injunction issued by this Court against respondent No.1. 5. In view of above, this Contempt Petition is dismissed. [P.R. BORKAR,J.] snk/2009/SEP09/cp137.09