hold the said property had entered into an agreement with respondent No.2-M/s.Quality Dairy Private Limited for sale of property for a consideration of Rs.4,70,00,000/- which offer was raised by the 2nd respondent by a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- when the application moved by the respondent No.1 under section 36 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act was being considered by the Charity Commissioner. Thus the property agreed to be sold by respondent No.1 to respondent No.2 is for consideration of Rs.4,75,00,000/-. The respondent No.1 has also agreed to suffer all the liabilities in regard to the said property such as taxes arrears of electricity bills etc. The application moved by respondent No.1 for seeking permission of the Charity Commissioner under section 36 was granted by Charity Commissioner vide order dated 12.1.07. Perusal of the operative part of the order reveals that the permission granted was subject to certain terms and conditions one of which was that the `order is subject to any provision or restriction in any law for the time being in force.' The respondent No.2 realizing that permission was required to be obtained from the Collector under the provisions of Bombay Tenancy Act, it moved an application before the Collector. The permission sought by respondent No.2 was rejected. Yet another application was moved by the 2nd respondent to the Director, Industry for seeking permission under the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act but the same was also turned down. In this situation the respondent No.2 and its directors approached respondent No.1-trust making a request to move the Charity
