Cognizance or not ?

The Bombay High Court's interim order directing AJ Construction Mumbai to file an affidavit in reply within 4 weeks, and their subsequent failure to comply, suggests that the court has taken cognizance of the contempt petition.

When a court issues an interim order and the respondent fails to comply, it indicates the court's seriousness about the matter. 

In contempt proceedings, the court's primary concern is to ensure compliance with its orders.

The fact that AJ Construction Mumbai didn't comply with the interim order may lead to further action, including possible punishment for contempt. 

To my knowledge and understanding, the Court seeking affidavit in reply from the respondent does not constitute an interim order. So also, the failure of the apposite party ti file the reply imply that the Court has taken cognisance. 

Of course Bombay High Court has issued notice only after taking note of disobidience of orders passed by the court.

What is the opinion and advise of the lawyer engaged by you, if it is your personal case and not a hypothetical story. 

This doesn't seems to be an interim order, the court has sought the reply from respondent, if the matter was listed in the meantime and if there was no reply filed by the respondent then you can put pressure on court to pass the orders in the contempt of court petition.

Good morning and thanks to all the experts who took time and offered  their considered opinions. Kindly keep it up as this is the only Forum which offers litigants serious replies which helps lay querists in taking further action.

Thank you so much for understanding and appreciations.