✦ Bombay High Court

D) (SHALIGRAM KISAN CHANDURKAR & Anr. v. SONAJI MAHARAJ SHIKSHAN SANSTHA) & Ors.

Letters Patent Appeal No. 165 of 2010PRASANNA B VARALE

Case at a glance

Outcome

Dismissed

The civil application stands dismissed

Provisions considered

Judgment

Operative part

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR C.A.Z. NO.768/2011 IN L.P.A. NO.165/2010 IN W.P. NO. 3407/2009 (D) (SHALIGRAM KISAN CHANDURKAR & ANOTHER VERSUS SONAJI MAHARAJ SHIKSHAN SANSTHA & OTHERS) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri S.R. Deshpande, counsel for the applicant. Shri V.M. Deshpande, counsel for the appellents. Shri N.R. Saboo, counsel for the R-3 to 6. Court's or Judge's orders CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND DATE : APRIL 18 PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. . , 2012 Heard. The civil application is misconceived and the prayer made therein cannot be granted. The Letters Patent Appeal No.165 of 2010 is already decided on 29.07.2010. In case, the applicant has any grievance against the not handing of the charge to the newly elected body, the applicant can move the appropriate authority under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The civil application stands dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE APTE

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: The civil application stands dismissed

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Letters Patent Appeal No. 165 of 2010). ← Search more judgments