Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

MANUKUMAR SHRIVASTAVAversusDAGDU PANDU SHINDE AND OTHERS

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petition is dismissed because the petitioners have received the compensation, leaving nothing for the petition to address.

Summary

In Contempt Petition No. 742 of 2015 arising out of WP/10066/2014, the petitioners alleged that the respondents had not paid the compensation due to them. The learned Additional Government Pleader initially claimed the petitioners were not coming to accept the compensation, but later produced receipts showing that the petitioners had indeed accepted the amount, which were recorded as "X". The Court examined these receipts and accepted them as conclusive evidence of payment. Since the compensation had been received, the Court found that there was no longer any ground for the contempt petition. Consequently, the petition was disposed of, along with any pending civil application, if any.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioners had accepted the compensation alleged to be unpaid
  • Whether the contempt petition could continue in view of the receipt of compensation

Subjects

  • contempt
  • compensation
  • petition disposal
  • receipt of payment
  • High Court

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:31086-DB

                                                                                742.2015CP

                                                      1

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                            27 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 742 OF 2015
                                     IN WP/10066/2014

                           DAGDU PANDU SHINDE AND OTHERS
                                          VERSUS
                          MANUKUMAR SHRIVASTAV AND OTHERS
                                             ...
                 AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. G.A. Kulkarni

                                         CORAM :           SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
                                                           VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV,JJ.

                                         DATE         :    27.07.2026

                 P.C. :


                 1]       None for the petitioners.
                 2]       Though the learned A.G.P. had earlier submitted that
                 the      petitioners   are   not         coming   for   accepting   the
                 compensation, but later on he placed on record receipts of
                 the petitioners whereby they have accepted the amount of
                 compensation. Those receipts are taken on record and
                 identified as “X” Collectively.
                 3]       Since, the petitioners have received the amount of
                 compensation, nothing survives in this petition and it stands
                 disposed of along with pending civil application, if any.




                 [VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV]                    [SANDIPKUMAR C.MORE]
                         JUDGE                                   JUDGE
                 sga


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.