Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Gauri Godse, J
Dr. Hari Tulshiram Gholap – Appellant
Versus
Jitendra Rajaram Savant – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conditional leave to defend requires solvent surety for claim amount. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. respondents' apology and offer to replace surety contested. (Para 4 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. breach of solvent surety constitutes willful civil contempt. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. undertaking breach to court is civil contempt; scrutinize apology. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. non-bona fide apology rejected; contemnors held guilty. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 6. contempt discharged via settlement undertaking and nominal fine. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
JUDGMENT :
FIRST SESSION
1. This contempt petition is filed by the original plaintiffs alleging willful breach of the order dated 2nd May 2011, passed in Spl. Summary Suit No. 207 of 2009 granting conditional leave to defend on furnishing a solvent surety equal to the claim amount, read with the order dated 10th October 2011, passed by this court in Writ Petition No. 8116 of 2011, confirming the order passed by the trial court.
2. As per the conditional leave granted, solvent surety was submitted in respect of Gat No. 775 by submitting the solvency certificate of respondent
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
