Kishor Kirtilal Mehta Vs the Assistant Charity Commissioner and Ors.

¶1

T

¶2

1

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 6914 OF 2009

¶5

Kishor Kirtilal Mehta

¶6

.. Petitioner

¶7

Vs

¶8

The Assistant Charity .. Respondents Commissioner and ors.

¶9

Mr. Mahesh Jethmalani, Senior counsel, a/w Mr Pranav Badhekar, Mr R.Singh, Mr S.Sapcco i/b M/s Hariani & Co, for the petitioner.

¶10

Ms Aparna D Vhatkar, AGP, for respondent nos 1 and 3.

¶11

Mr J.Jain a/w Atul Daga i/b Wadia G & Co for respondent no.2.

¶12

CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATE : 10/09/2009

¶13

PC:

¶14

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶15

This petition is directed against the order dated 30.7.2009 allowing the application filed by respondent no.2, seeking condonation of delay in filing Change Report No.403 of 2006. Mr Jethmalani, learned Senior Counsel, for the petitioner, challenged the impugned order on two grounds. Firstly, he

¶16

2

¶17

submitted that the Charity Commissioner has no powers to condone the delay in filing the Change Report if it is filed beyond the period of 90 days as contemplated by Section 22(1), of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, and secondly he submitted that the grounds on which the delay has been condoned, are perverse.

¶18

I do not find any substance in the first ground of challenge in view of the judgment of this court in Rajkumar Pundlikrao Zape and ors Vs. Shantaram Amrutrao Waghmare and ors, 2008(6) Bom.C.R.81, and hence the first ground of challenge is rejected outright. Insofar as the second ground of challenge is concerned, for the reasons recorded in the impugned order, I do not wish to entertain this petition in exercise of extremely limited jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and I am satisfied that the following order shall meet the ends of justice. Mr Jain, learned counsel for respondent no.2, has not objected for the following order.

¶19

The Charity Commissioner shall decide the change report on merits, in accordance with law and within the time stipulated by this court vide the order dated 27.2.2009, by which First Appeal No.2267 of 2007 with Cross-Objection No.584 of 2008

¶20

3

¶21

with Civil Application No.5148 of 2008 and the other companion matters were disposed of. All contentions of the parties including the issue of limitation are kept open to be raised in further proceedings challenging the final order passed by the Charity Commissioner on the Change Report.

¶22

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

Kishor Kirtilal Mehta v. the Assistant Charity Commissioner and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishor Kirtilal Mehta v. the Assistant Charity Commissioner and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kusum Dattaray Patil Vs Atmaram Gopinath Patil and Ors.

Ashok Tukaram Ganmale Vs Honble Dy. Charity Commissioner, Kolhapur and Anr.

Baban Dattu Mole Vs Karmaveer Bhaurao Patil Zilla Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit and Ors.

K. Sivasankar and Ors. Vs K. Narayanan Emran and Anr.

K. Sivasankar and Ors. Vs K. Narayanan Emran and Anr.

T. Krishnan Vs the Secretary - Slum Rehabilitation Authority and Ors.