(R. Banumathi and Navin Sinha, JJ.)
Cyrus Behram Irani Etc. ____________________________ Appellant(s)
v.
Anthony Sequeira & Ors. __________________________ Respondent(s)
Civil Appeal Nos. 3373-3374 of 2016, decided on July 11, 2018
With
Civil Appeal No. 3387/2016, Civil Appeal No. 3389/2016 and Civil Appeal No. 3388/2016
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
IN CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 3373-3374 of 2016
1. These appeals arise out of an order of the High Court dated 06.01.2012, pronounced on 13.2.2012, in First Appeal No. 1480 of 2011 by which the High Court set aside the order passed by the City Civil Court, Bombay, affirming the order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner registering the public trust and remitting the matter back to the Assistant Charity Commissioner with the direction to hold a fresh inquiry.
2. On 28.03.1919 Sir Jehangir Bommraji Borman Behram (Testator) executed a Will. The testator appointed four executors, namely, (i) Mr. Dinshaw Dorabji Boman Nussowanji (ii) Mr. Hormasji Sethna (iii) Mr. Bomanji Hormasji Boman Behram (iv) Mr. Faurdoonji Kawasji Bombam Behram. The testator has also made a codicil in respect of his property revoking various clauses of the will.
3. It is a common ground that at least two properties namely- (1) Boman Behram building at Mazgaon, Mumbai and (2) Bungalow at Bhagur near Devlab, Nasik, were not bequeathed to anyone and therefore, constituted residuary trust property.
4. Smt. Banoo, wife of the last executor Mr. Faurdoonji Kawasji Bombam Behram, had executed a trust deed on 01.12.1998 and by the order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner the same was ordered to be registered as public trust.
5. The respondents herein were unsuccessful in challenging the same before the Charity Commissioner as well as the Revisional Court namely, City Civil Court, Bombay. In the First Appeal filed by the respondents, the High Court by the impugned order set aside the order of registration of the public trust and directed fresh inquiry by the Assistant Charity Commissioner on the ground that the procedure contemplated under Sections 18 and 19 of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act (Bombay Act XXIX of 1950) has not been complied with.
6. We have heard Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, and also learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
7. Sections 18 of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act deals with Registration of the public trust. Section 19 deals with the inquiry for registration which contains various clauses based on which the Commissioner to make inquiry in the prescribed manner for the purpose of registering the public trust.
8. Having carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and having carefully gone through the impugned judgment, we are of the view that the High Court has rightly took the view that the mandatory provisions of Sections 18 and 19 of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act has not been complied with before the registration of the Trust, based upon the trust deed dated 01.12.1998.
9. In view of above, we do not find any ground warranting our interference in the impugned judgment. The appeals are, accordingly, dismissed.
10. The Assistant Charity Commissioner, Mumbai, shall expedite the inquiry, as directed by the High Court, preferably within a period of six months from today.
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 3387/2016, 3389/2016 and 3388/2016 :
11. Consequently, these appeals are dismissed as having become infructuous in view of the order passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 3373-3374 of 2016.
Civil Appeal No(s). 3373-3374/2016
Cyrus Behram Irani Etc _________________________ Appellant(s)
v.
Anthony Sequeira & Ors ________________________ Respondent(s)
With
C.A. No. 3387/2016 (III)
C.A. No. 3389/2016 (III)
C.A. No. 3388/2016 (III)
Date : 11-07-2018 These appeals were called on for hearing today.
(Before R. Banumathi and Navin Sinha, JJ.)
For Appellant(s) Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, Sr. Adv.
Mrs. Shubhangi Tuli, AOR Mr. Rohan Sharma, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Amit Verma, Adv.
Mr. Nitin Bhardwaj, AOR
Mr. Zubin Behram, Adv. Mr. Ashree, Adv.
Mr. Chander Shekhar Ashri, AOR
Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 3373-3374 of 2016
12. Heard.
13. Civil Appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed order.
14. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 3387/2016, 3389/2016 and 3388/2016
15. Consequently, these appeals are dismissed as having become infructuous in view of the order passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 3373-3374 of 2016.
———
