Bombay High Court
Shri Nathaji Mandir Sanstha vs Vishnu S/O Kisan Pakade on 24 April, 2014
Author: R.K. Deshpande
Bench: R.K. Deshpande
1/9
wp1207.00.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Writ Petition No.1207 of 2000
1. Shri Nathaji Mandir Sanstha,
(Shri Krishnalalaji Mandir Trust),
Registered under BPT Act,
through its Trustees -
(a) Dhirajlal Bhimajibhai Vaidya.
(b) Nyalchand Waghajibhai Gagalani.
(c) Rasiklal Maganlal Gagalani. }Petitioner Nos.(c), (d)
(d) Mahendra Kumar Maganlal Seth. }and (e) are deleted as per
(e) Govinda Vithaldas Rathi. }Court's order
}dated 6-2-2012.
(f) Keshavlal Chunnilal Seth.
All R/o Amravati, Tah. and
Dist. Amravati.
(g) Purushottamlalji s/o Vithalesh Raiji
Goswami,
R/o Khandiwali (West),
Mumbai.
(h) Rajendra Rasiklal Raglani,
Aged about 55 years,
::: Downloaded on - 30/04/2014 00:24:26 :::
2/9
wp1207.00.odt
R/o Amravati.
i) Himanshu Ajitkumar Ved,
Aged - Adult, R/o Amravati.
j) Vinod Gwaldasji Lakhotiya,
Advocate,
R/o Badnera Road,
Rajapeth, Amravati. ... Petitioners
Versus
1. Vishnu s/o Kisan Pakade,
Aged about 45 years,
R/o Morshi,
Near Main Road,
Tah. Morshi, Dist. Amravati.
2. Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, }Added as per Court's
Nagpur. }Order dated27-9-2012.
... Respondents
Shri A.J. Gilda, Advocate for Petitioners.
Shri R.R. Deshpande, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
::: Downloaded on - 30/04/2014 00:24:26 :::
3/9
wp1207.00.odt
Coram : R.K. Deshpande, J.
th Dated : 24 April, 2014 Oral Judgment :
1. The petitioner is a Public Trust, registered under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 on 15-3-1972.
It had defended the proceedings under Section 46 read with Section 54 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 for fixation of price in respect of the tenanted lands on the ground that the income from the said property was being utilized for the purposes of the Trust, and hence the applicability of Sections 46 and 54 was exempted by virtue of the provision of Section 129(b) of the said Act.
Although the claim was accepted by the Tahsildar, the Sub-Divisional Officer has set aside the order of the Tahsildar, which has been maintained by the Maharashtra Revenue ::: Downloaded on - 30/04/2014 00:24:26 ::: 4/9 wp1207.00.odt Tribunal. Hence, both these orders passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer as well as by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal are the subject-matter of challenge in this petition.
2. It is not disputed by the learned counsels appearing for the parties that the Authorities below have concurrently held that the income from the property is being utilized for the purposes of the Trust. Such a finding of fact has not been challenged by any of the parties before this Court.
3. Undisputedly, the Trust was registered on 15-3-1972 and hence relying upon the two decision of this Court - (i) in the case of Gajanan Maharaj Sansthan, Shegaon v. Digambar s/o Pandhari Bhise, reported in 2005(1) Mh.L.J. 1108; and (ii) in the case of Maroti Sansthan, Tiwsa v. Gulab Haribhau Jirapure ::: Downloaded on - 30/04/2014 00:24:26 ::: 5/9 wp1207.00.odt (dead) and others, reported in 2006(6) Mh.L.J. 367, it is urged by Shri Gilda, the learned counsel for the petitioners, that the registration of the Trust under the Bombay Public Trusts Act on the tillers' day, i.e. 1-4-1961, was not necessary. What is required to be shown is that the entire income of the Trust is being appropriated for the purposes of the Trust. He submits that in view of the findings of fact recorded by the Authorities below, the registration of the Trust on 15-3-1972 was of no consequence and the Trust was entitled to exemption under Section 129(b) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act.
4. Section 129(b) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 being relevant, is reproduced below :
::: Downloaded on - 30/04/2014 00:24:26 ::: 6/9wp1207.00.odt "129. Exemption from certain provisions to lands held by local authorities, Universities, trust, etc. --
Nothing in the foregoing provisions except section 2, the provision of Chapter II (excluding sections 21, 22, 23, 24 and 37) and section 91 and the provisions of Chapters X and XII insofar as the provisions of the said Chapters are applicable to any of the matters referred to in sections mentioned above shall apply,--
(a) .....
(b) to lands which are the property of a trust for an educational purpose, hospital, panjarpole, Gaushala, or an institution for public religious worship, provided the entire income of such lands is appropriated for the purposes of such trust; and
(c) .....
(d) .....
Explanation.-- For the purpose of clause (b), a certificate granted by the collector after holding any inquiry, that the conditions mentioned in the said clause are satisfied by the trust shall be the conclusive evidence in that behalf."
::: Downloaded on - 30/04/2014 00:24:26 ::: 7/9wp1207.00.odt In view of the aforesaid provision, what is required to be established is that - (i) the lands in question are the property of the Trust for an educational purpose, hospital, panjarpole, Gaushala, or an institution for public religious worship and
(ii) the entire income of such lands is appropriated for the purposes of such Trust. The existence of a Trust holding a property on the tillers' day, i.e. 1-4-1961, is the essential condition and in the absence of such finding, the question of utilizing the income for the purposes of the Trust is of no consequence.
5. There is neither any finding nor evidence on record to show that the lands in question were purchased either by the Private Trust or by the Public Trust or that there existed any such Deed of Settlement of Trust on or before the tillers' day, ::: Downloaded on - 30/04/2014 00:24:26 ::: 8/9 wp1207.00.odt i.e. 1-4-1961; on the contrary, it is urged by Shri Deshpande, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1, that the sale-deeds in respect of the said lands stand in the names of the individuals. In view of this, even if it is assumed that the Trust need not have been registered on or before 1-4-1961, the Trust was not entitled to claim exemption under Section 129(b) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act. The decisions relied upon by Shri Gilda for the petitioners does not deal with the question whether the lands in question belonged to any such Trust, which was created on or before the tillers' day, i.e. 1-4-1961. In view of this, the said decisions are not applicable to the present case.
6. In view of above, there is no substance in this petition.
::: Downloaded on - 30/04/2014 00:24:26 ::: 9/9wp1207.00.odt The same is dismissed. Rule stands discharged. No order as to costs.
Judge pdl ::: Downloaded on - 30/04/2014 00:24:26 :::