Supreme CourtDivision Bench(2000) 07 SC CK 0017

Smt. Nand Kantaben Janubhai Yodh (dead) by L.Rs. vs Dipsinh Gambhirsinh Thakor and Others

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 18 July 2000 · Citation: AIR 2003 SC 4462 : (2002) AIRSCW 2743 : (2000) 10 JT 290 : (2001) 4 Supreme 501

HON’BLE JUDGES
Shivaraj V. Patil, J · S. Rajendra Babu, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Appeal No. 339 of 1987

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 291 words
1.

An application was filed before the City Civil Court at Ahmedabad u/s 72 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 against the order dated 27-2-1980 given by the Joint Charity Commissioner. Before the Joint Charity Commissioner, three preliminary issues had been raised:

(1) Whether this inquiry is barred in view of disposal of Inquiry No. 92/75?

(2) Whether this inquiry is barred by limitation or lapse of time?

(3) Whether the inquiry is barred by the Principles of res judicata?

2.

The findings recorded by the Joint Charity Commissioner on preliminary issues were in the negative and the matter ended at that stage. Against that order of the Joint Charity Commissioner, the appellant preferred an application u/s 72 of the Bombay Public Trust Act before City Civil Judge. The City Civil Judge took the view that there is no effective disposal of the matter by the Joint Charity Commissioner and having not exercised his jurisdiction u/s 70(A) of the Act, question of examining the matter u/s 72(1) of the Act would not arise. Against that order a writ petition was filed in the High Court and the same was dismissed at the admission stage. Hence this appeal.

3.

We do not think that there are any good reasons to interfere with the order made by the City Civil Judge and there was also no good reason for the High Court to interfere with the order made by the City Civil Judge in exercising its writ jurisdiction. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.

4.

We, however, make it clear that this order will not come in the way of the appellant to pursue other remedies as may be permissible under the law after disposal of the matter by the Joint Charity Commissioner.