C. G. Gavnekar

Order - Status 5: R. B. Bohora Educational & Welfare Trust .. Petitioner -versus Vijay. V Mundaware .. Respondent. Mr. C.G. Gavnekar, for the Petitioner. S. N. Bhosle, AGP for respondent No.9. CORAM: R.V. MORE, J. DATED: 22nd July, 2010 P.C. vks Issue Notice before admission, returnable on 23.8.2010. In the meanwhile there shall be interim reliefs in terms of prayer clause (c). (R. V. MORE, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET WRIT PETITION NO.5595 OF 2010 1 ............................................................. Office Notes,Office memorandum of Coram, appearances,Court's Court's or orders or directions Judge's orders & Registrar's orders. ............................................................. Mr.Suhas Deokar i/b Mr.C.G.Gavnekar for the petitioner Mr.R.M.Patne ,A.G.P for the respondent No.9 CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. DATE : AUGUST 23,2010 P.C.: 1 Await service till 17th September 2010. In the meanwhile, Advocate for the petitioner will serve private notice to the respondent Nos.1 to 8. If Affidavit of service is not filed on or before 15th September 2010, Petition will stand dismissed for non prosecution without further reference to the Court. Ad-interim relief granted earlier to continue till further orders. JUDGE

Order - Status 11: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5595 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's Court's or orders or directions & Judge's orders. Registrar's orders. Shri C.G. Gavnekar for the Petitioner. Shri J. Shekhar i/;by M/s. J. Shekhar & Co. for Respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4. Shri Suhas S. Deokar for Respondent Nos. 5 to 8. Shri Suresh Bhosale, AGP for the Respondent No.9. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 14TH OCTOBER, 2010 P.C.: . Heard Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the 1st , 3 rd and 4th Respondents. Heard learned AGP for Respondent No.9. The impugned order has been passed in purported exercise of powers under Section 41A of the Bombay Public Trusts act, 1950. Considering the scope of Section 41A of the said Act, prima facie, it appears that the impugned order could not have been passed in exercise of the said power. Rule. There will be interim relief in terms of prayer clause (d). Ash Notwithstanding pendency of this petition and grant of interim relief, it will be open for the parties to take action in accordance with law. (A.S.OKA, J)

Order - Status 9: ssm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5617 OF 2008 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Court's or Judge's Orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr.C.G.Gavnekar for the Petitioners. Mr.R.D.Soni i/by M/s.Ram & Company for Respondent No.2. CORAM : ANOOP V.MOHTA, J. DATED : 21st November, 2008. P.C. . The Petitioners have challenged the impugned order dated 24/04/2008 whereby, on application filed by Defendant Nos. 1 to 5 and 17 to 20, basically contending that before hearing of the Application Exhibit 5, it is necessary to consider the aspect of deficit in stamp as per Bombay Stamp Act. There is no dispute that the appeal against the said injunction order is also dismissed. The learned Judge, therefore, while deciding this application clearly observed that the parties are at liberty to raise this point while leading the evidence and at the time of hearing of the suit. In view of this, I see there is no reason to interfere with the said order. The intention with regard to the deficiency and as contemplated under Section 34 of the Bombay Stamp Act need to be considered at the earliest by the Trial Court. However, for grant of injunction/relief that may be one of the facet, but that itself cannot be the reason not to consider the application at this stage of the proceedings. There is no dispute that while passing the injunction order at Exhibit 5, there is always various facets which court consider to grant interim order. The validity or deficiency of stamp is a matter which can be gone into at the appropriate stage of the proceedings. Court cannot decline any interim relief on this ground. In view of this keeping all points open, the present Writ Petition is dismissed. . No costs. [ ANOOP V.MOHTA,J.]