Bombay High Court

DHUPAJI CHAGUNA KAPSE AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The contempt petition is disposed as there is no remaining cause of action.

Summary

The petitioners, Dhupaji Chaguna Kapse and others, filed a contempt petition (No. 503 of 2011) against the State of Maharashtra and others. No petitioner appeared before the court on the hearing date. The respondent State filed an affidavit-in-reply indicating that the compensation amount had been deposited in the trial court, implying that the petitioner had likely withdrawn the claim. The court observed that, in view of the deposit and the petitioner's non‑appearance, there was no substantive ground left for the contempt proceeding. Consequently, the court ordered that the contempt petition stand disposed.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate disposition of a contempt petition when the petitioner fails to appear and the underlying compensation has been deposited, indicating possible withdrawal?

Subjects

contempt
petition dismissed
non‑appearance
compensation deposit
trial court

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:42539


                                             1               908 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 503 OF 2011



                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                           908 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 503 OF 2011
                                     IN WP/4237/2011

                           DHUPAJI CHAGUNA KAPSE AND ORS
                                          VERSUS
                               THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS
                                             ...
            Adv. S. J. Salgare, AGP for Respondents-State
                                             ...

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

                                       DATED : 11/09/2026
                ORDER ( Per Vaishali Patil-Jadhav, J. ) :-

            .          None appears for the petitioner.

            2.         The affidavit-in-reply is filed by the respondent No.5. It

            appears that the compensation amount was deposited in the Trial

            Court and it is assumed that subsequently, the petitioner must

            have withdrawn the same.


            3.         As such, nothing survives in the contempt petition, and the

            same stands disposed of.




            ( VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, J. ) ( SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J. )

            shivani/

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…