Gujarat High Court High Court

Zala vs Joint on 15 October, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Zala vs Joint on 15 October, 2008
Author: Mr. K.S.Radhakrishnan,&Nbsp;Honourable Kureshi,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

LPA/1175/2008	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 1175 of 2008
 

In


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11522 of 2008
 

With


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 12086 of 2008
 

In
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 1175 of 2008
 

 
=============================================


 

ZALA
BALASINHJI DIWANSINHJI - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

JOINT
CHARITY COMMISSIONER & 3 - Respondent(s)
 

=============================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
MC BHATT WITH MR JIGAR P RAVAL for Appellant(s) : 1, 
GOVERNMENT
PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1, 
None for Respondent(s) : 2 - 3,
3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.5,3.2.6 -
4. 
============================================= 

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 15/10/2008 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN)

Heard
learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner.

We
find no infirmity in the reasonings of the learned Single Judge in
the order impugned in this Letters Patent Appeal.

Even
on facts also, it reveals that the Joint Charity Commissioner has
rejected the application of the Mehsana Panjarapole Trust under
Section 36 of the Bombay Public Trust giving liberty to the trust to
initiated the process afresh. Some adverse observations were made by
the Joint Charity Commissioner against the Trustee of the Trust which
led the trustees to file an appeal before the Gujarat Revenue
Tribunal. Since the application of the trust was rejected, the
appellant-petitioner who was highest bidder in the auction
proceedings, also preferred an appeal before the Gujarat Revenue
Tribunal praying to confirm the sale of the trust property in his
favour. The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal of the trustee
expunging the remarks, and dismissed the appeal of the
appellant-petitioner. We find that now the trust is not interested to
sell the property. Therefore, the trust cannot be compelled to sale
the property against their interest.

That
being the fact situation, we will not be justified to interfere with
the order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner as well as the
order passed by the Tribunal.

With
the above observations, the Letters Patent Appeal and Civil
Application for stay stand dismissed.

(K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, C.J.)

(AKIL
KURESHI, J.)

kailash

   

Top