Allowed

Bahujan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Islampur, through Secretary, Suryakant Tatoba Mali v. Shri. S. T. Mali and Ors.

Bombay HC3 Jul 2012CAW/1475/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an application to implead the applicant as a party respondent in a writ petition challenging orders of the Charity Commissioner, directing the respondent to amend the petition within one week.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No. 1 to implead applicant as respondent No. 5 in Writ Petition No. 846 of 2012 and Civil Application No. 256 of 2012 within one week.

Bahujan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Islampur, through… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

CAW256 & 1475_2012

¶2

Vidya amin

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1475 OF 2012 IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 256 OF 2012 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 846 OF 2012

¶5

Bahujan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Islampur

¶6

Islampur .... Applicant vs. Suryakant Tatoba Mali & Ors. .... Respondents

¶7

Dr. D.P. Mane, applicant in person present. Mr. A.T. Gade, Advocate for Respondent no. 1. Mr. A.I. Patel, AGP for respondent nos. 2 to 4.

¶8

CORAM : R.G. KETKAR, J. DATE : 3^rd July, 2012.

¶9

P.C.

¶10

Heard Dr. D.P. Mane, applicant who appears in person, Mr. A. T. Gade, learned counsel for respondent no. 1 and Mr. A.I. Patel, learned AGP for respondent nos. 2 to 4.

¶11

By this application, the applicant is praying for impleading him as partyrespondent in Civil Application No. 256 of 2012 and Writ Petition No. 846 of 2012.

¶12

Dr. Mane invited my attention to the Miscellaneous Application No. 1010 of 2006 made by him along with Mr. B.R. Gaikwad, Secretary of Bahujan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Islampur, a trust registered under the provisions of Societies Registration Act, 1860 and Bombay Port Trusts Act, 1950. He submitted that the said application was made on 7^th December, 2006 and the learned

¶13

1 Of 3

¶14

CAW256 & 1475_2012

¶15

Assistant Registrar of the Societies, Sangli allowed the application on 27^th December, 2006. Against this decision, the trust through respondent no. 1 herein filed two appeals, namely, Appeal No. 4/2007 and 05/2007. The said appeals were dismissed by the learned Joint Charity Commissioner, Kolhapur.

¶16

Aggrieved by this order, respondent no. 1 instituted Writ Petition no. 846 of 2012. However, the applicant is not made party respondent in the said petition. He, therefore, submits that the application be allowed and respondent no. 1 herein be directed to implead the applicant herein as partyrespondent in the main petition and Civil Application No. 256 of 2012.

¶17

Mr. Gade submitted that the applicant was not party before the learned Joint Charity Commissioner, Kolhapur Region, Kolhapur and therefore, he is not impleaded as partyrespondent.

¶18

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties. As noted earlier, Miscellaneous Application No. 1010 of 2006 was made by the applicant and the same was allowed on 27^th December, 2006. Aggrieved by this order, respondent no. 1 preferred appeals which were dismissed on 27^th March, 2008. Respondent no.1 has preferred Writ Petition no. 846 of 2012 challenging the order dated 27^th December, 2006 and 27^th March, 2008. Since the applicant is one of the applicants in Miscellaneous Application no. 1010 of 2006, respondent no. 1 herein ought to have impleaded him as party respondent to the petition. Since respondent no. 1 did not implead applicant as party respondent, the present application is filed.

¶19

2 Of 3

¶20

CAW256 & 1475_2012

¶21

After perusing the material on record and after hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties, I am satisfied that the application deserves to be allowed. Hence, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) with no order as to costs. Respondent no. 1 is directed to carry out amendment and implead the applicant herein as party respondent no. 5 in Writ Petition No. 846 of 2012 as also in Civil Application No. 256 of 2012. Amendment shall be carried out within one week from today. List the Writ Petition for admission on 23^rd July, 2012.

¶22

3 Of 3

Bahujan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Islampur, through Secretary, Suryakant Tatoba Mali v. Shri. S. T. Mali and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bahujan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Islampur, through Secretary, Suryakant Tatoba Mali v. Shri. S. T. Mali and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajit Shankar Jadhav Vs Gopinath Patil Parsik Janta Sah. Bank, Thane and Ors.

Amir Aga Vs Shaikh Abdulla Shaikh Yunus (Decd.)by Lrs.- Abdulla Rehman Abdulla Shaikh and Ors.

Shri. Sadashiv Mhalappa Vhanmane Vs Shri. Baban Shivaji Bhosale and Ors.

Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd., Vs Medha Yashwant Satoskar

Gujabai B.Sul(D.H.)Pandurang B. Sul and Ors. Vs Sham N. Badar and Ors.

Shri.Duryodhan Narayan Patil Vs Shri. Subhash Shripat Kot and Ors.