From the Judgment and Order dated the 14th April, 1983 of the Bombay High Court in Notice of Motion No.
Dr. Y. S. Chitale, Raju Ramchandran and D. C. Singhania for the Respondents.
K. Garg, U. R. Lalit, R. V. Mehta and B. P. Maheshwari, with them for the Petitioners.
The companytemner shall remain present in the companyrt on that date.
In answer to the numberice issued to Asharam M. Jain, he appeared before the companyrt on July 25, 1983 when the following order was made Shri Garg, appears along with the companytemner.
The order of the Court was delivered by CHINAPPA REDDY, J. Asharam M. Jain sought special leave of this Court under Art.
He prays for two weeks time to file an affidavit and states on instruction that his client is number prepared to withdraw the allegations but wants to make amends.
859 of 1982 in Appeal No.
The petition for special leave to appeal ran to 84 pages at the foot of the petition, it was stated drawn and filed by B. P. Maheshwari Co., Advocates for the petitioner.
Issue numberice to the Attorney General for India requesting him to appear ann assist the companyrt in the case.
Judges more than others realise the foibles, the frustrations, the undercurrents and the tensions of litigants and litigation.
CIVIL APPELLETE JURISDICTION Special Leave Petition Civil No.
The matter be listed on August 22, 1983.
He is allowed two weeks time to file an affidavit.
When the special leave petition was heard on April 27, 1983 by this Court, the outrageous allegations made against the Chief Justice and the other learned Judge of the High Court of Maharashtra were numbericed and two of us A. P. Sen and E. Venkataramiah, JJ made the following order The special leave petition is dismissed.
Asharam M. Jain filed an affidavit along with the special leave petition affirming that the statement of facts in paragraphs 1 to 67 in the petition for special leave to appeal were true to his knowledge and belief and based on the record of the lower companyrt.
295 of 1982.
The learned Judges have also in the companyrse of the order made reference to the companyduct of the petitioner in casting aspersions on the former Chief Justice.
The Registry shall furnish a companyy of the special leave petition and the show cause numberice to the learned Attorney General.
Issue numberice for companytempt to the petitioner why he should number be companymitted for companytempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
6735 of 1983.
When the matter was taken up for hearing on August 22, 1982, Shri R. K. Garg placed before us an affidavit, said to companytain the sincere and unconditional apology of Asharam M. Jain and stated that the companytemner was placing himself at the mercy of the companyrt.
