Bombay High Court

BABAN TULSHIRAM SURADKARversusSANJAY DIKALE THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORD AURANGABAD AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The contempt petition is dismissed for non prosecution.

Summary

Petitioner Baban Tulshiram Suradkar filed a contempt petition arising from Writ Petition No. 9235 of 2018. The petitioner failed to remove objections raised by the court and the first respondent, the Deputy Director of Land Records, could not be served because he retired. No further steps were taken by the petitioner to advance the proceedings. The Court observed that the petitioner appeared uninterested in pursuing the matter. Consequently, the contempt petition was dismissed for non prosecution.

Issues considered

Whether the contempt petition can be entertained when the petitioner has not removed court objections and the respondent remains unserved due to retirement

Subjects

Contempt of Court
Writ Petition
Service of Notice
Retirement of Respondent
Non prosecution

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:44688-DB

                                                                         113.20CP

                                                 1

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          3 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 113 OF 2020
                            IN WRIT PETITION NO.9235 OF 2018

                               BABAN TULSHIRAM SURADKAR
                                          VERSUS
                                      SANJAY DIKALE
                          THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORD
                                  AURANGABAD & OTHERS
                                             ...
                            AGP for Respondent-State : Mr.N.B.Patil
                                             ...
                                     CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
                                                 VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV,JJ.

                                      DATE      :    28.09.2026
                 P.C. :


                 1]          None for the petitioner.



                 2]          It appears from the record that the petitioner had

                 not removed office objections and the respondent no.1

                 remained unserved due to his retirement. No steps are taken

                 thereafter. Thus, it appears that the petitioner is not

                 interested in proceeding with the matter, As such, the

                 Contempt Petition is dismissed for non prosecution.




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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…