Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.58 seconds)

Smt. Vanmala Manoharrao Kamdi vs The Deputy Charity Commissioner on 4 May, 2012

In the case of Vanmala Manoharrao Kamdi and others vs. Deputy Charity Commissioner, Nagpur and others, reported in 2012(3) Mh.L.J. 594, the Division Bench of this Court held that when an administrative order is passed which is in the interest of the society or the Trust, there could be occasions, which would not necessitate grant of any hearing to the trust or its members. The Division Bench held that in such cases, most of the time the satisfaction is subjective and, therefore, hearing before making any order may not be possible in each case.
Bombay High Court Cites 63 - Cited by 22 - Full Document

Jagatnarayansingh Swarupsingh ... vs Swarupsingh Education Society And Anr. on 26 November, 1979

15. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also cited before me the case of Jagatnarayansingh Swarupsingh Chithere and ::: Uploaded on - 04/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 21:09:06 ::: J-wp497,498 & 499.16.odt 16/18 others vs. Swarupsingh Education Society and another, reported in 1980 Mh.L.J. 372, wherein the learned Single Judge of this Court, relying upon the decision of Gujarat High Court in Shantilal Khimchand and others vs. Mulchand Dalichand and others, held that while exercising jurisdiction under Section 22 of the said Act, the Assistant Charity Commissioner must inquire into not only the factum of the change under consideration but also its legality and validity. In my humble opinion, the ratio of this case would be of assistance to the petitioner in the change reports which are pending for adjudication before the Deputy Charity Commissioner and not in this case. Even otherwise, the decision being upon the merits of the Change Reports, at this stage, it would not have any application to the facts of the present case.
Bombay High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 24 - Full Document

Shantilal Khimchand And Ors. vs Mulchand Dalichand And Ors. on 18 July, 1961

15. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also cited before me the case of Jagatnarayansingh Swarupsingh Chithere and ::: Uploaded on - 04/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 21:09:06 ::: J-wp497,498 & 499.16.odt 16/18 others vs. Swarupsingh Education Society and another, reported in 1980 Mh.L.J. 372, wherein the learned Single Judge of this Court, relying upon the decision of Gujarat High Court in Shantilal Khimchand and others vs. Mulchand Dalichand and others, held that while exercising jurisdiction under Section 22 of the said Act, the Assistant Charity Commissioner must inquire into not only the factum of the change under consideration but also its legality and validity. In my humble opinion, the ratio of this case would be of assistance to the petitioner in the change reports which are pending for adjudication before the Deputy Charity Commissioner and not in this case. Even otherwise, the decision being upon the merits of the Change Reports, at this stage, it would not have any application to the facts of the present case.
Gujarat High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 11 - Full Document

Shri Shakil Musa Patel vs Shri Dilipsing Pratapsing Patil on 31 July, 2013

14. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to me the case of Shakil Musa Patel and another vs. Dilipsing Pratapsing Patil and others, reported in 2014(1) Mh.L.J. 960, wherein the learned Single Judge of this Court held that when a ::: Uploaded on - 04/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 21:09:06 ::: J-wp497,498 & 499.16.odt 15/18 dispute regarding the list of members of a Trust was pending, the Joint Charity Commissioner ought not to have issued any direction in respect of those list of members. The facts of the said case of Shakil Patel are quite different from the facts of this case. In that case, the District Court was already in seisin of substantive matter before it and therefore, it was observed that the Joint Charity Commissioner, while disposing of the appeals, could not have at all touched the issue arising in the matter pending before the District Court by taking a direct recourse to Section 41-A of the said Act.
Bombay High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 5 - A B Chaudhari - Full Document
1