Bombay High Court
Raghunath Kaparthi S/O Naryan vs The Assistant Charity ... on 8 July, 2016
Bench: Z.A. Haq
1 wp7099.14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.7099/2014
Raghunath Kaparthi s/o Narayana,
aged about 60 Yrs., Occu. Business,
R/o Balaji Electro Smelter Ltd.
MIDC Lohara, Yavatmal. ..Petitioner.
..VS..
1. The Assistant Charity Commissioner,
Yavatmal.
2. Institute Management Committee of I.T.I.,
Babhulgaon, through Secretary Ramesh
Umaji Rathod, C/o I.T.I. Babhulgaon,
Tq. Babhulgaon, Distt. Yavatmal,
A trust bearing registration
No.MH-346/2009 F-13306 (Ytl.) ..Respondents.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ms. A.S. Athalye, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Hemlata Jaipurkar, A.G.P. for respondent No.1.
Shri S.A. Ashirgade, Advocate for respondent No.2.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.
DATED : 8.7.2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard Ms. A.S. Athalye, Advocate for the petitioner, Ms. Hemlata Jaipurkar,
A.G.P. for the respondent No.1 and Shri S.A. Ashirgade, Advocate for the respondent
No.2.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
3. The proceedings under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act are going
on before the Assistant Charity Commissioner. In these proceedings, the petitioner is
opposing the change report submitted by the respondent No.2. On 7 th June, 2014,
2 wp7099.14
the matter was fixed for cross-examination of the witness of respondent No.2. The
Advocate representing the petitioner could not attend the proceedings when the
matter was called out and when the learned Advocate attended the proceedings in the
afternoon session, according to him, it was informed that the case was adjourned for
recording of evidence. According to the petitioner, on the next date his Advocate got
knowledge that the Court had directed to proceed further and because of it the
petitioner is deprived of the opportunity to cross-examine the witness of the
respondent No.2.
Though the conduct of the petitioner is deprecable, considering that the matter
is in respect of public trust, the following order is passed to sub-serve the interests of
justice.
(i) The impugned orders are set aside.
(ii) The Assistant Charity Commissioner is directed to give an opportunity to the
petitioner to cross-examine the witness of the respondent No.2.
(iii) If the petitioner fails to conduct cross-examination of the witness of respondent
No.2 on the date fixed by the learned Assistant Charity Commissioner for that
purpose, the petitioner shall lose the opportunity of cross-examining the witness and
the Assistant Charity Commissioner shall proceed further.
(iv) The petition is allowed in the above terms.
(v) The petitioner shall pay costs of Rs.2,000/- (Rs. Two Thousand Only) to the
respondent No.2 and produce the receipt of it on the record before the Assistant
Charity Commissioner till the next date.
JUDGE
Tambaskar.
3 wp7099.14
CERTIFICATE
"I certify that this Judgment/Order uploaded is a true and correct copy of original
signed Judgment order"
Uploaded by : N.V. Tambaskar. Uploaded On : 18.7.2016
Personal Assistant.
