Bombay High Court
DAGDU PANDU SHINDE AND OTHERSversusMANUKUMAR SHRIVASTAV AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The petition is disposed because the petitioners have already received the compensation.
Summary
In Contempt Petition No. 742 of 2015 arising out of WP/10066/2014, the petitioners alleged that the respondents had not paid the compensation due to them. The Attorney General initially claimed the petitioners were not coming to accept the compensation, but later produced receipts (identified as “X”) showing that the petitioners had indeed accepted the amount. The Court took these receipts on record. Since the compensation had been paid, the Court found no remaining issue for the petition. Consequently, the petition was disposed of, along with any pending civil application, if any.
Issues considered
- What is the status of the petitioners' claim for compensation after the receipt of payment?
Subjects
- contempt
- compensation
- petition disposed
- receipt of payment
- High Court
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:31085-DB
742.2015CP
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
27 CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 742 OF 2015
IN WP/10066/2014
DAGDU PANDU SHINDE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
MANUKUMAR SHRIVASTAV AND OTHERS
...
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. G.A. Kulkarni
CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV,JJ.
DATE : 27.07.2026
P.C. :
1] None for the petitioners.
2] Though the learned A.G.P. had earlier submitted that
the petitioners are not coming for accepting the
compensation, but later on he placed on record receipts of
the petitioners whereby they have accepted the amount of
compensation. Those receipts are taken on record and
identified as “X” Collectively.
3] Since, the petitioners have received the amount of
compensation, nothing survives in this petition and it stands
disposed of along with pending civil application, if any.
[VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV] [SANDIPKUMAR C.MORE]
JUDGE JUDGE
sga
Checking your session…