Disposed

Shri. Ganeshnath Maharaj Sansthan Thru Its Trustess Shri. Umaji Navaji Niwate (President) and Ors. v. Shri. Ganeshnath Maharaj Sansthan Thru Trustees Shri. Arvind G Goswami (President) and Ors.

Bombay HC23 Jan 2024WP/4785/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Trust registration dispute: an appellate/revisional authority had set aside registration of the petitioner-trust. Both sides consented to a remand. The High Court quashed the orders and restored the trust registration application to the Assistant Charity Commissioner, permitting respondents to file objections.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 11.10.2018 and 18.06.2015 quashed; Application No. 347 of 2014 restored to Assistant Charity Commissioner, Alibag for fresh decision after hearing respondents' objections within

Shri. Ganeshnath Maharaj Sansthan Thru Its Trustess Shri. Umaji Navaji Niwate (President) and Ors. Vs Shri. Ganeshnath Maharaj Sansthan Thru Trustees Shri. Arvind G Goswami (President) and Ors. — Bombay HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

 20-WP-4785-2019.docx

¶2

rrpillai

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4785 OF 2019

¶4

Shri Ganeshnath Maharaj Sansthan … Petitioners through its Trustees Shri Umaji Navaji Niwate (President) and Others

¶5

Vs.

¶6

Shri Ganeshnath Maharaj Sansthan … Respondents through its Trustees

¶7

Shri Arvind G. Goswami (President)

¶8

and Others

¶9

Mr. Pradeep M. Patil i/b. Mr. Pravin B. Gole and Mr. Nimish S. Parakh for the Petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Pralhad Paranjape a/w. Mr. Manish Kelkar for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

¶11

Mr. S. L. Babar, AGP for the State.

¶12

Mr. Arvind Ganesh Goswami – Respondent No. 1 present in court.

¶13

CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATE : 23^rd JANUARY 2024

¶14

P.C.

¶15

1. By the impugned order dated 18^th June 2015 the registration of

¶16

the petitioner-Trust is set aside.

¶17

Digitally signed by RAJESHWARI RAJESHWARI RAMESH RAMESH PILLAI PILLAI Date: 2024.01.29 13:07:26 +0530

¶18

1/4

¶19

 20-WP-4785-2019.docx

¶20

Perusal of the record indicates that respondent nos. 1 to 4 had

¶21

not objected in the proceeding for registration of the petitioner-trust. However, when respondents nos. 1 to 4 learnt about the registration of the petitioner trust, they preferred an appeal. That appeal is allowed and the order granting registration to the petitioner-trust has been quashed and set aside.

¶22

Respondents nos. 1 to 4 had no opportunity to raise their objections opposing the registration of the petitioner trust. By the impugned order the appeal preferred by respondents nos. 1 to 4 is allowed by the learned Charity Commissioner by holding that inspite of the existence of respondent no. 1 trust registration of petitioner trust is permitted without conducting a proper inquiry. Hence, in my view, it would have been appropriate to remand the matter to the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Raigad Region, Alibag for considering the petitioner’s application for registration of trust after examining the objections on behalf of respondents nos. 1 to 4 and giving them an opportunity of being heard.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing for respondents nos. 1 to 4 on instructions states that respondents nos. 1 to 4 are agreeable to

¶24

2/4

¶25

 20-WP-4785-2019.docx

¶26

remitting the matter to the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Raigad Region, Alibag for reconsideration of the petitioner’s application for registration of trust after examining the objections of respondent nos. 1 to 4. Learned counsel for respondents nos. 1 to 4 states that the respondents be permitted to file their objection before the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Raigad, Alibag.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection to re-hearing the application for registration of the petitioner-trust after allowing respondents nos. 1 to 4 to place on record their objections.

¶28

In view of the aforesaid statements made on behalf of the respective parties, by consent of the parties the petition is disposed of by passing the following order :

¶29

(i) The impugned orders dated 11^th October 2018 passed by the Charity Commissioner, Maharashtra State, Mumbai in Revision Application No. 172 of 2016 and order 18^th June 2015 passed in Application No.347 of 2014 passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Raigad Region, Alibag are quashed and set aside.

¶30

3/4

¶31

 20-WP-4785-2019.docx

¶32

(ii) Application No. 347 of 2014 filed by the petitioner-trust under Section 19 of The Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 is restored to the file of Assistant Charity Commissioner, Raigad Region, Alibag.

¶33

(iii) Respondents nos. 1 to 4 are at liberty to file their objections before the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Raigad Region, Alibag within four weeks from today.

¶34

(iv) The Assistant Charity Commissioner, Raigad Region, Alibag shall decide Application No. 347 of 2014 afresh after examining the objections and after giving the opportunity of hearing to respondents nos. 1 to 4.

¶35

(v) It is clarified that I have not examined the rival contentions of the parties on merits and hence all contentions of all parties are kept open.

¶36

(vi) Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶37

(vii) All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

¶38

[GAURI GODSE, J.]

¶39

4/4

Shri. Ganeshnath Maharaj Sansthan Thru Its Trustess Shri. Umaji Navaji Niwate (President) and Ors. v. Shri. Ganeshnath Maharaj Sansthan Thru Trustees Shri. Arvind G Goswami (President) and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Ganeshnath Maharaj Sansthan Thru Its Trustess Shri. Umaji Navaji Niwate (President) and Ors. v. Shri. Ganeshnath Maharaj Sansthan Thru Trustees Shri. Arvind G Goswami (President) and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Moraji Bhikulal Mantri Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Minister for Revenu and Ors.

Yashwant Krishnaji Gokhale and Anr. Vs Govind Babu Kundekar and Anr.

Vijay Purushottam Yadav Vs Konkan Housing and Area Development Board,Mumbai

Ranitai Sandip Mohite Vs Sanjay Bhimrao Mohite and Ors.

Solitaire Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs Vertex Newton Projects Private Ltd. and Anr.

Dattatray Nathaji Dongre Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Presiding Officer and Ors.