1 CP-405-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 405 OF 2010 Murlidhar Dttoba Nimankar & Ors. ... Petitioners Vs. Madan Dattoba Nimankar ... Respondent Shri Amit B.Borkar,Advocate for the petitioners. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 11th July, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2. In Civil Application No. 1179/2010 in First Appeal No.526/10, on 8.4.2010, this Court had directed parties to maintain status quo. The petitioner contends that the respondent has committed breach of the order and in support of that he has produced three photographs which were allegedly taken on 30.6.2010. The photographs do not show that any construction work was going on. The petitioner has not produced the photographs of the property taken on or before 8.4.2010 and therefore merely by perusal of the photographs which are produced it cannot be said that any status has been changed after the order. In the petition, there is no specific averment as to what addition was made after the said order. In 2 CP-405-10.sxw view of this, I find no substance to take action for contempt of the Court. Petition stands dismissed. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)