Allowed

Vishwas Ramchandra Agalave and Ors. v. Chinchwad Deosthan Trust and Ors.

Bombay HC15 Oct 2007LPA/64/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Letters Patent Appeal, the Court modified an interim order directing the District Judge to examine a dispute regarding the sharing of offerings between poojaries and trustees. The Court directed the Joint Charity Commissioner, Pune, to investigate and issue appropriate directions under the scheme.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order was modified to direct the Joint Charity Commissioner, Pune, to investigate the sharing of offerings and regulate the dispute between poojaries and trustees. The LPA and Civil Appli

Vishwas Ramchandra Agalave and Ors. Vs Chinchwad… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.

¶4

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.64 OF 2005

¶5

IN

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.9470 OF 2004

¶7

Shri Vishwas Ramchandra Agalave

¶8

and others

¶9

: Appellants.

¶10

versus

¶11

Chinchwad Deosthan Trust

¶12

and others

¶13

: Respondents.

¶14

Ms.Sharvari Shailendra i/by Mr.P.S.Dani for the

¶15

appellants.

¶16

Mr.S.V.Pitre for Respondent No.1.
Mr.R.M.Patne, AGP, for Respondent No.7.

¶17

CORAM : J.N.PATEL &

¶18

A.A.SAYED, JJ.

¶19

DATED : OCTOBER 15, 2007.

¶20

¶21

P.C.

¶22

1.Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The appellants are the original petitioners who
have filed this LPA against the order of the
Single Judge dated 2nd March 2005 passed in the
proceedings under Section 41A of the Bombay
Public Trust Act 1950. By the impugned order the
learned Single Judge directed, by way of interim
measure that in so far as sharing of offerings to
the deity is concerned, that may be examined by
the District Judge in accordance with the
prevailing practice in other Ashtavinayakas by
way of guidance. Further injunction on the
appellants i.e. Poojaries is that they would not
disturb the donation boxes until the District
Judge comes out with final proposals.

¶23

3.We find that the scheme administering the
respondent-trust stood modified by substituting
the District Judge by Joint Charity Commissioner,
Pune. The dispute is in respect of sharing of
the offerings by the appellant-poojaries and the
trust which is already provided for under the
scheme.

¶24

¶25

4.It appears that the dispute between the
appellants-poojaries and the trust arose as it
was noticed by the trustees that the poojaries
are preventing/obstructing offerings, donation by
devotees who were tendering them in the donation
boxes kept for the said purposes.

¶26

5.In our view, only modification of the
impugned order required is that in the place of
District Judge, the direction ought to have been
given to the Joint Charity Commissioner to look
into the matter. We, therefore, modify the
impugned order accordingly and direct the Joint
Charity Commissioner, Pune to personally look
into the matter and issue appropriate directions
so as to regulate the sharing of offerings
between the poojaries and trustees in accordance
with the scheme and that the poojaries do not
exceed their rights to corner the donations which
are meant for the trust.

¶27

6.We further make it clear that the

¶28

aggrieved parties can move the appropriate
authorities in the matter after the Joint Charity

¶29

¶30

Commissioner, Pune complies with the directions
issued by this Court.

¶31

7.We expect the Joint Charity Commissioner
Pune to take decision in the matter within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt of
this order. This order be communicated to the
Joint Charity Commissioner by the learned counsel
appearing for the parties and extend their
co-operation in resolving the dispute. Till the
Joint Charity Commissioner, Pune takes decision
in the matter, the present arrangement would
continue to operate. With this modification and
the aforesaid directions the LPA stands disposed
of accordingly with no order as to costs.

¶32

8.Civil Applications filed in this matter
do not survive. They are disposed of

¶33

accordingly.

¶34

[A.A.SAYED,J]

Vishwas Ramchandra Agalave and Ors. v. Chinchwad Deosthan Trust and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishwas Ramchandra Agalave and Ors. v. Chinchwad Deosthan Trust and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Shri.Manik R. Jagdale and Ors.

Central Bank of India. Vs Shridhar Chandrakant Sawant and Ors.

Gajanan Krishnaji Tandel Vs Shashikant Raghunath Tandel and Othrs

Pradeep Raghunath Penkar Vs Shweta Pradeep Penkar and Anr.

M/S. Vaidya and Co. and Ors. Vs the Municipal Corporation of the City of Thane andOR

Mr. Vallabhai Moolji Dedhia Vs Mr. Terrence Joseph Coutino and Ors.