The court has the discretion to accept an apology and dispose of a contempt petition based on the circumstances and the nature of the breach.

Heard Shri S.G. Dessai, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Shri A.D. Bhobe, the learned Counsel appearing for respondents no.1 to 4 & 7 to 13 and Shri D. Pangam, the learned Counsel appearing for respondent no.14.

2. The petitioner has filed the above contempt petition complaining that the sale deed has been executed on 15/09/2005 in breach of the orders passed by this court dated 31/08/2005.

3. Shri S.G. Dessai, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has pointed out that despite of an order passed of status quo by this Court, in breach thereof willfully the respondents no.1 to 4 & 7 to 13 have executed the said sale deed. The learned Counsel pointed out that it is a serious matter that the respondents have committed a contempt and, as such, they should be prosecuted under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act. The learned Counsel has taken me through the order passed by this Court and pointed out that there was a specific order directing the parties to maintain status quo and despite of the said order the said sale deed came to be executed. The learned Counsel, as such, submits that the petitioner has made out a case for issuing notice in Form A under the contempt of Courts Act against the respondents.

4. On the other hand, Shri A.D. Bhobe, the learned Counsel appearing for respondents no.1 to 4 & 7 to 13 pointed out that the respondents had no intention to commit any contempt and in fact according to him the disputed sale deed was executed through a power of attorney who was not a party to the petition. The learned Counsel further points out that in the reply filed in this Court the said respondents at para 1 of the application have stated thus:

“1. At the outset I state that I have highest regard for this Hon'ble Court. The Respondents have not violated any order passed by this Hon'ble Court nor have these Respondents any intention whatsoever to disrespect the majesty of this Hon'ble Court. These Respondents tender unconditional apology.”

The learned Counsel, as such, submits that the Writ Petition preferred by the petitioner has already been disposed of and the matter which was remanded to the learned Mamlatdar has also been decided. The learned Counsel, as such, submits that the said respondents had no intention to commit any breach of orders passed by this Court and any breach of such order was unintentional and without any malafides. The learned Counsel, as such, submits that lenient view be taken and the notice issued to the respondents be discharged.

5. I have carefully considered the submissions of the learned Counsel as well as the order stated to have been breached by the said respondents. On perusal of the said order this Court had passed an order to maintain status quo. The dispute which was under consideration by this Court was a matter of injunction whereby the petitioner had sought relief to restrain the respondents from interfering in the suit property. In the light of the said reliefs the order of status quo came to be passed. Once an order of status quo was passed in the background of the dispute between the parties, I find prima facie the respondents were not justified to execute such sale deed. But however taking note of the contentions of the learned Counsel appearing for the said respondents that the execution of the said sale deed was not intentional and at para 1 of their affidavit they have categorically stated that they had no intention whatsoever to disrespect the majesty of this Court and as they have tendered an unconditional apology and as it is also reported that the petitioner has already expired, I find it appropriate that in view of the fact that the petition is pending for such a long period of time the same may be disposed of by accepting the said apology. The apology given by respondents no.1 to 4 & 7 to 13 at para 1 is accepted. As such, the above contempt petition stands disposed of subject to the said respondents depositing a sum