Bombay High Court

NAGNATH MUKUND JAGTAP AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The contempt petition was dismissed as there was no longer any surviving issue.

Summary

The petitioners, Nagnath Mukund Jagtap and others, filed a contempt petition (Contempt Petition No. 421 of 2013) against the State of Maharashtra and related parties, alleging non‑compliance with a monetary claim. Respondent No. 3 filed an affidavit stating that the claim amount had been deposited with the Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition), Osmanabad on 9 December 2013 after submitting a demand to the Maharashtra Krishna Valley Development Corporation. The court inferred that the petitioners must have withdrawn the amount thereafter. On this basis, the court found that no issue remained for adjudication in the contempt proceeding. Consequently, the contempt petition was dismissed as there was nothing left to entertain, and the petition was disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether the contempt petition remains maintainable after the alleged satisfaction of the petitioners' monetary claim.

Subjects

contempt of court
land acquisition
deposit of claim amount
petition disposal
judicial relief

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:40119

                                                                          908 cp 421-13 .




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                 908 CONT. PETITION NO. 421 OF 2013
                                          IN WP/5380/2011

                         NAGNATH MUKUND JAGTAP AND ORS
                                        VERSUS
                     THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                           …
          Mr. Rajdeep D. Raut, AGP for Respondent-State
                                           ….
                                 CORAM       : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
                                               VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.

                                        Date      :   01/09/2026

          PER COURT :
          1.   None for the petitioner.
          2.   The report of the Resource Personnel of this Court indicates that
          respondent No. 3 has filed an affidavit-in-reply. In paragraph 2 thereof,
          it is stated that the deponent had submitted the demand to the
          Maharashtra Krishna Valley Development Corporation, Pune and that
          the amount due towards satisfaction of the claim of the petitioners was
          deposited with the office of the Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition),
          Osmanabad, on 09/12/2013.
          3.   As such, it is presumed that, by now, the petitioners must have
          withdrawn the said amount.
          4.    In view of the same, nothing survives in the present contempt
          petition and the same stands disposed of.




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



                     VS Maind/                                        Page|1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…