Bombay High Court
Abhay Lalit SuranaversusSumitra Abhay Surana
- Disposal
- Dismissed
- Bench
- SANDESH D PATIL
Holding
The Court held that there was no contempt as there was no willful disobedience of the order.
Summary
Petitioner Abhay Lalit Surana filed a contempt petition alleging that Respondents Sumitra Abhay Surana and others willfully disobeyed an order dated 4 August 2025 passed in an appeal against Order No. 444. The order directed that if a disputed amount had not been disbursed, Respondents 2 and 3 were to refrain from disbursing it until the next hearing, and if already disbursed, the recipient was to keep the amount in her bank account until the next hearing. The Court examined the order and found that the directions were clear and that there was no evidence of any willful breach by the respondents. Consequently, the Court held that no contempt had occurred. The contempt petition was therefore dismissed and the petition disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the respondents committed contempt of court by allegedly violating the interim order dated 4 August 2025.
Subjects
- contempt of court
- interim order
- order compliance
- civil procedure
- disbursement
Judgment
10-CP-562-2025 (C).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 562 OF 2025
IN
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 10795 OF 2025
Abhay Lalit Surana ..… Petitioner
VS
Sumitra Abhay Surana & Ors. ..… Respondents
...
Adv. Aishwarya Shinde (Through VC) Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. Pankaj P. Deokar, APP for Respondent No. 3-State.
Mr. Ajit Vishwanath Alange, Advocate for Respondent No. 1.
...
CORAM: SANDESH D. PATIL, J.
DATED: 6th AUGUST 2026.
P. C. :
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
2. By the present Petition, the Petitioner alleges contempt of the
order dated 4th August 2025 passed in Appeal against Order No. 444 of
2025 by the Hon’ble Single Bench of this Court.
3. I have perused the order dated 4th August 2025. A plain reading of
the said order makes it clear that the Court was conscious of the dispute
regarding whether the amount had been disbursed. Accordingly, in
paragraph 4 of the said order, the Court specifically directed that, if the
Shubham 1
10-CP-562-2025 (C).doc
amount had not yet been disbursed, Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 shall not
disburse the same till the next date of hearing. It was further directed
that, if the amount had already been disbursed, the recipient shall
maintain the amount in her bank account and shall not part with the
same till the next date.
4. Hence there is no question of willful disobedience of the order of
the Court as a result, the Contempt Petition is dismissed as there is no
contempt of the order.
5. The Contempt Petition stands disposed of.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)
Digitally
signed by
TALLE
TALLE SHUBHAM
SHUBHAM ASHOKRAO
ASHOKRAO Date:
2026.08.07
16:59:11
+0530
Shubham 2
Checking your session…