Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2026 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. Bombay High Court/
  4. 2024/
  5. January

Yogesh Associates vs. State of Maharashtra

Decided on 31 January 2024• Citation: CP/406/2023• Bombay High Court
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                                              1                                   
                                                        16-CP-406-2023.doc        
                     IN THE  HIGH  COURT   OF JUDICATURE   AT BOMBAY              
                             CIVIL  APPELLATE   JURISDICTION                      
                           CONTEMPT    PETITION  NO.  406 OF 2023                 
                  Yogesh Associates                   ...Petitioner               
                          Versus                                                  
                  State Of Maharashtra and Ors.       ...Respondents              
                                            ****                                  
                  Mr. Shubham Gurav i/b Talekar and Associates for the Petitioner.
       SNEHA                                                                      
                  Ms. A.A. Purav, AGP for Respondent No.1.                        
       NITIN                                                                      
       CHAVAN                                                                     
                  Ms. Archana Gaware i/b Kedar Dighe for Respondent No.2/PCMC.    
       Digitally signed                                                           
       by SNEHA                             ****                                  
       NITIN CHAVAN                                                               
       Date: 2024.02.02                                                           
       17:52:53 +0530                                                             
                                     CORAM    : NITIN JAMDAR   AND                
                                               M.M.SATHAYE,    JJ.                
                                       DATE  : 31 JANUARY   2024                  
                  P.C. :                                                          
                  .         The  contempt is alleged of the order dated 29        
                  November 2023 in Writ Petition No. 1455 of 2023. By this order a
                  simplicitor direction was issued to take a decision within a period of
                  8 weeks and the decision has to be communicated thereafter to the
                  Petitioner. If any adverse order was to be passed, the Petitioner was
                  given liberty to challenge the same.                            
                  2.        The Contempt Petition is filed on the ground that the 
                  said order is not complied with. Affidavit is tendered by the   
                  Respondent Corporation wherein communication of the Petitioner  
                  to the Corporation is sought to be placed on record, where it is stated
                  Sneha Chavan                                                    

                                              2                                   
                                                        16-CP-406-2023.doc        
                  that the corporation is proceeding to acquire the land by way of
                  consensus and it is also decided to pay the amount immediately and
                  therefore, the Contempt Petition would be withdrawn. All this was
                  not in contemplation of the Court when it passed the order in the
                  Writ Petition. The Court only directed to take decision and     
                  communicate it to the Petitioner. It appears to us that the Contempt
                  jurisdiction is being used by the Petitioner for some other purposes.
                  We decline to proceed in contempt jurisdiction.                 
                  3.   The Contempt Petition is disposed of.                      
                   (M.M.SATHAYE,  J.)              (NITIN JAMDAR,  J.)            
                  Sneha Chavan