The Division Bench dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal against an interim order allowing a disputed trustee to continue dispensing with major decisions on trust property pending final hearing.
Interim arrangement allowing the disputed trustee to continue with restrictions on alienation of trust property upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
.{1}.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.299 OF 2007
AGAINST
WRIT PETITION NO.5698 OF 2007
---
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.400 OF 2007
IN
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.299 OF 2007
Shri.Arvind Thakorlal Vaidya
and another. ..Appellants.
-Versus-
Shri.Deepak Motiram Ghone
and others. ..Respondents.
....
Mr.C.U.Singh, Sr.Advocate i/b. Mr.Shriram S.
Kulkarni, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr.V.A.Thorat, Sr.Advocate i/b. Shri.Surel S. Shah,
Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 5.
Mr.R.M. Patne, A.G.P., for the respondent Nos.10 & 11.
CORAM : J.N. PATEL AND
SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ.
DATED : 5TH FEBRUARY, 2009.
P.C.:-
1. Heard.
2. This Letters Patent Appeal is preferred
impugning the interim order passed by the learned
.{2}.
Single Judge while admitting the Petition.
3. The matter pertains to management of the Trust
which owns immovable property and the issue between
the parties is appointment of trustees which was the
subject matter of challenge before the learned Single
Judge.
4. In the given facts situation, we do not find
that the learned Single Judge has committed an error
or illegality in permitting the trustee whose
appointment is under dispute to continue to function
with a rider that "they would not take any decision
with regard to alienating or encumbering the trust
property or take major policy decisions until this
Petition is heard finally." The learned Single Judge
has also expedited the hearing of the Petition.
5. We are not supposed to go into the merits of the
matter and other proceedings pending between the
parties, as we have already observed. Hence, the
interim arrangement is to continue till the Petition
is decided in terms of the impugned order.
.{3}.
6. It will be open to the learned Counsel for the
parties to approach the learned Single Judge to seek
a fixed date for hearing of the petition for which
the counsel for the respondents has no objection,
irrespective of a reference in the matter pending
before the Division Bench.
7. We further make it clear that the other
proceedings pending before the learned Charity
Commissioner can proceed on its own merits and to be
disposed of in accordance with law.
8. With the above observations, this Letters Patent
Appeal is dismissed. In view of dismissal of the
Letters Patent Appeal, Civil Application is also
disposed of.
[J.N.PATEL,J.]
[SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Single Judge committed an error by permitting the disputed trustee to continue functioning pending final hearing.
Shri. Arvind Thakorlal Vaidya and another
Shri. Deepak Motiram Ghone and others
J.N. Patel
Smt. V.K. Tahilramani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court