Gujarat High Court
Dharmisthaben Natwarlal Sadhu vs Charity Commissioner & 6 on 7 March, 2017
Author: R.M.Chhaya
Bench: R.M.Chhaya
C/SCA/13087/2016 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13087 of 2016
With
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12723 of 2016
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13087 of 2016
With
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 558 of 2017
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13087 of 2016
==========================================================
DHARMISTHABEN NATWARLAL SADHU....Petitioner(s)
Versus
CHARITY COMMISSIONER & 6....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance in SCA No.13087/16:
MR SIDDHARTH H DAVE, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 5 7
MR VENUGOPAL PATEL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR PARTHIV B SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No.34
MR SHALIN MEHTA, SR. ADVOCATE with MR VIMAL A PUROHIT,
ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
Appearance in CA No.12723/16:
MR SHALIN MEHTA, SR. ADVOCATE WITH MR VIMAL A PUROHIT,
ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VENUGOPAL PATEL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR PARTHIV B SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No.34
MR SIDDHARTH H DAVE, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
Appearance in CA No.558/17:
MR ND NANAVATY, SR. ADVOCATE with MR YASH N NANAVATY,
ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VENUGOPAL PATEL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR PARTHIV B SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 34
MR SIDDHARTH H DAVE, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 8
MR SHALIN MEHTA, SR. ADVOCATE WITH MR VIMAL A PUROHIT,
ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA
Date : 07/03/2017
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
Page 1 of 4HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Wed Mar 08 00:51:46 IST 2017 C/SCA/13087/2016 ORDER
2. The writ petition is directed against the order dated 04.05.2016 passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Vadodara under section 36 of the Gujarat Public Trust Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). Civil Application No.12723/16 is filed by the original respondent no.2 for vacating the interim relief which was granted by this Court vide order dated 04.08.2016. Similarly, Civil Application No.558/16 is filed by the third party who has purchased the property in question by registered sale deed on 12.08.2016 under Registration No.1273/16 before the SubRegistrar, Vadodara, which has been executed by the original petitioner during the pendency of the petition.
3. Mr. Siddharth Dave, learned advocate appearing for the original petitioner has pointed out to the Court that during the pendency of this petition, the sole petitioner has expired.
4. Mr. N.D. Nanavati, learned senior advocate appearing with Mr. Yash Nanavati, learned advocate appearing in Civil Application No.558/17 does not press the Civil Application for being substituted as a petitioner/copetitioner in light of the fact that the applicant who claims right over the land in question which is subject matter of the impugned order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Vadodara under section 36 of the Act intends to challenge the said order as provided under section 36(3) of the Act before Page 2 of 4 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Wed Mar 08 00:51:46 IST 2017 C/SCA/13087/2016 ORDER the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal. It is a matter of record that the Sale Deed is executed on 12.08.2016 when the petition was pending and as averred in the application, the original petitioner passed away on 21.09.2016 when they came to know about the pendency of the petition and the present application is filed by the applicant/third party on 28.12.2016.
5. In view of the fact that the original sole petitioner has expired, the main petition abates. However, the applicant of Civil Application No.558/17 is at liberty to file an appropriate proceeding as provided under section 36(3) of the Act before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal. If any such proceeding is filed by the applicant of Civil Application No.558/16 on or before 17.03.2017, the learned Gujarat Revenue Tribunal shall deal with it in accordance with law and shall not consider such proceeding under sub section (3) of section 36 only on the ground of limitation as the applicant has purchased the property on 12.08.2016 and the sole petitioner has transferred the property during the pendency of this petition by a registered sale deed. It is however clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits and all the parties, including the respondents in the petition, shall be made parties even in the proceeding which may be filed by the applicant of Civil Application No.558/17 before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal. It would be open for the Page 3 of 4 HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Wed Mar 08 00:51:46 IST 2017 C/SCA/13087/2016 ORDER applicant of Civil Application No.558/17 to file an application for stay and the same may be considered by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal after hearing all the parties within a period of 7 days. It goes without saying that the party in whose favour the order under section 36 of the Act is passed is also a party respondent in the main petition and any development which takes place hereinafter shall be subject to further orders that may be passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal including the application for stay if any preferred by the applicant of Civil Application No.558/17.
6. The petition is disposed of as the sole petitioner has expired and the same abates. Civil Application No.12723/16 also stands disposed of in view of the order passed in the main matter and Civil Application No.558/17 stands disposed of with the aforesaid directions, observations and clarifications. Notice discharged. Ad interim relief granted earlier stands vacated. D.S. permitted.
(R.M.CHHAYA, J.) bjoy Page 4 of 4 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Wed Mar 08 00:51:46 IST 2017