SANKAR CHAKRABORTY Vs. PRATAP CHAKRABORTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for contempt on the allegation of willful disobedience of my order dated December 22, 1999 by which I disposed of a revisional application preferred by the petitioner by setting aside the order passed by the learned first appellate Court below and directing the parties to maintain status quo as regards the suit property with specific direction that so far room No. 1 is concerned, the petitioner and his men and agent will have right of passage over it for the purpose of going to room No. 2 and such right of passage should not be interfered with by the plaintiff.

(2.) The petitioner has alleged that inspite of full knowledge of the said order, the plaintiff has put a padlock at the gate of room No. 1 thereby preventing the petitioner and his customers from entering into room No. 2 which is a place of business of the petitioner.

(3.) Subsequently, by supplementary affidavit the petitioner has annexed photographs taken on May 23, 2001 and June 25, 2001 showing that the grill-gate in front of the door of room No. 1 is kept under lock and key.