Bombay High Court

PRAMOD BHIMAJI DAHATONDEversusVAISHALI PRAMOD DAHATONDE AND ANR

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The contempt petition stands disposed because the subject matter is infructuous and the underlying order has been disposed.

Summary

The petitioner filed a contempt petition challenging an interlocutory order that had already been disposed of by the District Judge. The court observed that, due to the passage of time, the subject matter of the contempt petition had become infructuous. Moreover, the underlying writ petition (WP/6242/2009) sought relief against the same interlocutory order, which the district court had already disposed of on 19‑10‑2012. Since the order in question no longer existed, there was nothing left to enforce or punish for contempt. Consequently, the court held that the contempt petition could not proceed and was disposed of. The petition was therefore dismissed as infructuous.

Issues considered

What is the effect on a contempt petition when the subject matter becomes infructuous?
Does the disposal of the underlying interlocutory order preclude continuation of a contempt proceeding?

Subjects

contempt
infructuous
interlocutory order
writ petition
disposal

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:43083

                                                                      222.2010CP

                                               1

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          5 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 222 OF 2010
                                   IN WP/6242/2009

                                  Pramod Bhimaji Dahatonde
                                           VERSUS
                            Vaishali Pramod Dahatonde and another
                                               ...
                 Mr. Sanjay N. Gaikwad h/f Mr.Gaware N.V., Advocate for the
                 Petitioner
                 Mrs. M.N. Ghanekar, AGP for Respondent/State
                 Mr. A.K. Gawali, Advocate for Respondent no.1
                                               ...

                                     CORAM :       VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV,J.

                                     DATE     :    21.09.2026

                 P.C. :


                 1.         Due to passage of time the subject matter of this
                 contempt petition has become infructuous.
                 2.         Otherwise also, in Writ Petition No.6242/2009,
                 the petitioner has challenged the interlocutory order passed
                 in Civil Misc. Application No.4/2008 and the said Civil Misc.
                 Application is itself disposed of by the District Judge-2,
                 Ahmednagar vide order dated 19.10.2012.
                 3.         In view of the same, nothing survives in the
                 present contempt petition and the same stands disposed of.




                                              [VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV]
                                                       JUDGE
                 sga

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…