IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.573 OF 2024 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (ST.) NO.25708 OF 2026 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (ST.) NO.19820 OF 2026 Dilipkumar Rameshchandra Patel .... Petitioner Vs. Ajmera Enterprises .... Respondent Mr. Shravan M. Vyas, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. Dushyant Krishnan for Respondent nos. 2, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 13. Mr. Aansh Desai a/w P.J. Shah for Respondent no.3. Mr. Saurish Shetye a/w Mr. Karan Singh i/b Jenil Shah for Respondent no. 4. Mr. Parth P. Shah for Respondent no. 5. Mr. Prathamesh Bhargude a/w Ms. Khushboo Shah for Respondent nos. 6 and 7. Mr. Hiten Ajmera, Respondent no. 5 – present in-person. CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 17th September 2026 P.C. : 1. The present Contempt Petition has been filed alleging violation of the Order dated 11th January 2024. In particular, paragraphs 40 and 41 of the said Order, which are relevant for the purposes of the present Contempt Petition, are reproduced below: 1/5 11 CP 573.24+.doc Dusane “40. The advocate for the respondent/landlord submits that the applicant/defendant should also clear the entire outstanding of agreed rent amount which according to him is Rs.34,81,602/-. Mr. Bansal, advocate for the applicant/original defendant has disputed this position. According to him the entire rent has been paid. 41. Mr. Bansal on instruction from his client submits that if there is any outstanding amount, the same will be directly paid to the respondent landlords, within a period of three months. The said undertaking is accepted as an undertaking given to this Court.” 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Respondents have violated the aforesaid order. 3. Perusal of the Order would indicate that it is the contention of the landlord that an amount of Rs. 34,81,602/- is due and outstanding. The learned Advocate for the original Defendant, however, has disputed the said position and submitted that the entire rent has been paid. However, on instructions, the learned Advocate for the Defendants has further stated that, if any amount is found to be outstanding, the same would be paid to the Respondent-landlord within a period of three months. 4. The said statement/undertaking is accepted as an undertaking given to this Court. 5. Learned counsel for the Contempt Petitioner submits that paragraph 44, in particular, clearly shows that a statement was made on instructions that the outstanding amount would be paid within three weeks. He further 2/5 11 CP 573.24+.doc Dusane points out the communication dated 21st May 2010. 6. Learned counsel relies upon the communication dated 7th May 2024 addressed by the partners of M/s. Ajmera Enterprises and the legal heirs of the deceased partners of M/s. Ajmera Enterprises. In particular, he draws attention to paragraph 4 thereof, which is reproduced below for ready reference: “4. Further, please note that we are in financial difficulty as majority of the partners have expired and our family is also in financial difficulty, of which even your client is aware of, and therefore on humanitarian ground as well by an act of sympathy, your client is requested to waive off the outstanding rent and the mesne profit, if any claimed by your client. Your client's settlement amount would have provided some financial relief to us, but due to Mr. Hiren Ajmera's non- cooperation the same could not materialize.” Wherein, in the communication addressed to the Petitioner’s Advocate, it is stated that the Defendants are facing financial difficulties, as the majority of the partners have expired and their respective families are also experiencing financial hardship, of which the Petitioner is admittedly aware. In view thereof, the Petitioner was requested, on humanitarian grounds and as an act of sympathy, to waive the outstanding rent and mesne profits, if any, claimed by the Petitioner. 7. Learned counsel has also relied upon the communication dated 21st May 2010 to contend that certain rent dues were outstanding. However, the 3/5 11 CP 573.24+.doc Dusane said communication, being dated 31st May 2010, is much prior in point of time to the order passed by this Court in January 2024. Consequently, the said communication cannot be relied upon for determining the position as it stood at the time of the order passed by this Court. 8. The communication dated 7th May 2024 would indicate that the plea is made on humanitarian grounds, and that the outstanding rent and mesne profits, if any, claimed by the Contempt Petitioner, be given up. However, there is no clear admission of any liability in favour of the Petitioner. 9. The submission made by the learned Advocate appearing for the Writ Petitioner before this Court, as recorded in the order dated 11th January 2024, on instructions, is twofold. First, it is submitted that the entire rent has been paid and that there are no outstanding amounts. It is further submitted that, in the event any amount is found to be outstanding, the same shall be paid to the landlord. 10. The position as regards the outstanding amount remains disputed, and there is no clear undertaking to this Court that the particular amount would be paid to the Petitioner. No case of contempt is made out with reference to paragraphs 40 and 41 of the order of this Court. However, liberty is reserved to the Contempt Petitioner to recover any outstanding amount, if any, in accordance with law. 4/5 11 CP 573.24+.doc Dusane 11. Accordingly, the Contempt Petition is dismissed. 12. In view of the dismissal of the Contempt Petition, Interim Applications do not survive, the same are also disposed of. [ ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. ] 5/5 11 CP 573.24+.doc Dusane