FLORIDA KHARSHIING v. G.D GUPTA
Court: High Court of Meghalaya
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. BHATTACHARJEE
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Meghalaya judgment dated 2026-07-29. FLORIDA KHARSHIING v. G.D GUPTA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Serial No. 01 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Cont. Cas(C)No. 25 of 2026 Date of Order: 29. 07. 2026 Smti. Florida Kharshiing W/o (L) Abdul Haque R/o Rynjah, Umpling, Shillong East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya. ….. Petitioner -VERSUS- Shri. G. D. Gupta, Son of (L) J. Kanoo R/o U. P Sweet Meat, Police Bazaar, Shillong East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya. ….. Respondent Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. R. Jha, Adv For the Respondent(s) : Mr. A. Khan, Adv (ORAL) Heard Mr. R. Jha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also Mr. A. Khan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. By this contempt petition, the petitioner has alleged wilful disobedience of the order dated 29. 04. 2026 passed by this Court in MC(SA) No. 1 of 2026. Upon issuance of notice, the respondent entered appearance and filed a show cause explaining the allegations made in the contempt petition. Mr. A.
Khan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, submits that there was no wilful disobedience of the order dated 29. 04. 2026 and that the additional lock on the disputed premises was put under a misconception and due to a misreading of the order dated 29. 04. 2026. He further submits that, consequent to the passing of the order dated 14. 07. 2026 in MC(SA) No. 3 of 2026, the respondent removed the additional lock immediately. Mr. R. Jha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner though has submitted that the explanation offered by the respondent is not acceptable, but as the additional lock has now been removed, leaves the matter to the discretion of the Court. Considering the above aspect of the matter, more particularly, the fact that the additional lock put by the respondent has already been removed, this Court does not see any reason to initiate contempt proceeding against the respondent and accordingly, this petition stands disposed of. Judge Meghalaya 29. 07.
2026 “Shrity,PS”
Source: High Court of Meghalaya. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.