SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Bom) 1561

B.P.DHARMADHIKARI
ARUN KESHAVRAO MONE – Appellant
Versus
RAMESH BALVANT BAXI – Respondent


( 1 ) THIS is an Appeal against Order under Order 43 Rule 1 (u) of civil Procedure Code, challenging the Judgment of remand passed by First Ad hoc Additional District Judge, Nagpur, dated 19-8-2005 in Miscellaneous Civil appeal No. 785 of 1998. The respondents have raised objection about its maintainability and according to them, Appeal under section 72 (4) of Bombay public Trust Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as B. P. T. Act) which is in the nature of Second Appeal as per section 100 of Civil Procedure Code is alone tenable. I have heard parties on this issue on various dates and on 25-10-2005, case was closed for passing orders on this objection. Parties were directed to maintain status quo as existing on that date till today.

( 2 ) BARE facts necessary for determination of this controversy can now be stated. The impugned judgment is delivered on an application under section 72 of b. P. T. Act and said application, in turn, was challenging the order dated 30-9-1998 passed by Joint Charity Commissioner, Nagpur in Appeal No. 32 of 1998. This appeal before Joint Charity Commissioner was against the order dated 26-6-1998 passed by Deputy Charity Commissioner in Inquiry No. 1042 o








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top