Dismissed

The Norwegian Free Evangelical Mission Dhonora and Anr. v. the Norwegian Free Evangelical Mission India Charity Trust Chopda and Ors.

Bombay HC29 Jun 2011WP/7447/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition seeking directions under the Bombay Public Trust Act was dismissed as the petition was not for a proper purpose.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; prayer B declared infructuous; petitioner directed to approach appropriate authority; prayer C dismissed as not for proper purpose.

What the court decided

The Norwegian Free Evangelical Mission… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

wp7447.09

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 7447 OF 2009

¶6

The Norwegian Free Evangelical Mission, Dhanora and another ...Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Norwegian Free Evangelical Mission India Charity Trust, Chopda and others ...Respondents

¶9

Mr. R.R. Mantri, advocate for the petitioners Mr. Ajay Talhar, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1,2, 4 to 6

¶10

CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE AND M.T. JOSHI, JJ.

¶11

DATED : 29TH JUNE, 2011

¶12

PER COURT:-

¶13

1 The prayers in the petition are as follows;-

¶14

“A. Issue Rule.

¶15

B. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ commanding the respondent No.3 Assistant Charity Commissioner, Jalgaon to take action against respondent No.1 as per order of Joint Charity Commissioner, Nashik and under Bombay Public Trust Act.

¶16

C. Issue a similar writ and direct the respondents 1 and 2 not

¶17

wp7447.09

¶18

-2-

¶19

to interfere into the affairs of petitioner No.1 so also its property funds grants and donations etc. and further direct respondent No.3 to take suitable action against respondent No.2 U/s. 41A to 41E of Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950.

¶20

D. Pending admission hearing and disposal of this writ petition, direct the respondent No.3 to initiate appropriate action as per order dated 31.1.2007 of Joint Charity Commissioner, Nashik and under Bombay Public Trust Act against respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 to 6.

¶21

E. Any other suitable and equitable relief may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner.”

¶22

2 The learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4 to 6 states, on instructions, that the prosecution has already been launched against them and therefore, prayer “B” has become infructuous.

¶23

3 As regards prayer “C”, the petitioner is free to move the appropriate authority under the provisions of Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950.

¶24

4 The petition is dismissed.

¶25

rlj/

¶26

( M. T. JOSHI, J.) (SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.)

¶27

wp7447.09

¶28

-3-

The Norwegian Free Evangelical Mission Dhonora and Anr. v. the Norwegian Free Evangelical Mission India Charity Trust Chopda and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

The Norwegian Free Evangelical Mission Dhonora and Anr. v. the Norwegian Free Evangelical Mission India Charity Trust Chopda and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anju Suryaprakash Demda Vs the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution and Ors.

Prakash Ramji Halge Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

M/S a B Dongre and Company through Partner a B Dongre Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Zakiyoddin Amiruddin and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The Chief Executive Officer, Zp, Osmanabad and Anr. Vs Vithal Sopan Randive and Anr.

Vidyut Area Tantrikk Kamgar Union Circle Osmanabad through Its Secretary Angad Babruwan Jagdale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.