Kishor K Mehta vs. Rekha H Sheth
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Case Registered
Listed On:
6 Feb 2014
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
| º1 | 1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ITEM NO.301 | COURT NO.6 | SECTION IX | ||
| S U P R E M E C O U R T O F<br>RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS | I N D I A | |||
| I.A. 31/2016 & I.A. 32/2016 in<br>Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) | No(s).3772/2014 | |||
| Court Of Bombay) | (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04/02/2014<br>in CA No. 329/2014 04/02/2014 in WP No. 735/2014 passed by the High | |||
| KISHOR K MEHTA | Petitioner(s) | |||
| VERSUS | ||||
| REKHA H SHETH & ORS | Respondent(s) | |||
| 12.4.2016 and directions and office report) | (Appln(s) for clarification/modification of court's order dated | |||
| Date : 06/05/2016 These matters were called on for hearing today. | ||||
| CORAM : | HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA<br>HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY | |||
| For Petitioner(s) | Ms.<br>Mr.<br>Mr.<br>Mr.<br>Mr.<br>Mr.<br>Mr.<br>Mr.<br>Mr.<br>Mr.<br>For | Indira Jaising,Sr.Adv.<br>Vivek Tankha,Sr.Adv.<br>Yashank Adhyaru,Sr.Adv.<br>Kartik Seth,Adv.<br>Pallav Palit,Adv.<br>Dakshesh,Adv.<br>Rohan Kothri,Adv.<br>Parth Tiwari,Adv.<br>Sachin Pujari,Adv.<br>Devrath,Adv.<br>M/s. Khaitan & Co. | ||
| For Respondent(s) | Mr.<br>Ms.<br>Mr. | Shyam Divan,Sr.Av.<br>Sangeeta Bharti,Adv.<br>Krishanu Adhikary,Adv. | ||
| Signature Not Verified | Mr. | Suhaas Ratna Joshi,Adv. | ||
| Digitally signed by<br>NARENDRA PRASAD<br>Date: 2016.05.09 | Mr. Gurukrishna Kumar,Sr.Adv. | |||
| 17:24:22 IST | Mr. Ashish Kumar,Adv. | |||
| Reason: | Ms. Prerna Mehta,Adv. | |||
| Mr. Manoj K. Mishra,Adv.<br>Mr. Vmesh Dubey,Adv.<br>Ms. Meghna Kalra,Adv.<br>2 | ||||
| Mr. Sandeep Gupta,Adv.<br>Ms. Rekha Pandey,Adv. | ||||
| Respondent-in-person | ||||
| Mr. Ajay Kumar,Adv. |
Mr. Kunal Verma,Adv. Mr. Anil Kumar Mishra,Adv. Mr. O. P. Bhadani,Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi,Adv. Mr. Mahaling Pandarge,Adv. Mr. Nishant Katneshwarkar,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Ms. Indira Jaising, learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant, at the very outset, when we pointed out that the averments and allegations stated in paragraphs 7, 9 and 10 in I.A. No.32 of 2016, as against the Ex-Chairman of the Interim Board were wholly uncalled for and unparliamentary, fairly came forward to state that the applicant unconditionally withdraws these allegations levelled against the Ex-Chairman of the Interim Board, who is Former Chief Justice of the High Court. The said statement made on behalf of the applicant is recorded and the expressions used in the whole of paragraph 7, expressions "oblique motive" in paragraph 9 and "blatant falsehood" mentioned in paragraph 10 stands deleted.
In I.A. No.31, the applicant, petitioner in the special leave petition, inter alia prays to clarify specifically that the Interim Board will become functus officio and the charge be given to the three undisputed Trustees and the claimant Trustees/other alleged Trustees can join the Board of Trustees once adjudication of Change Reports are complete subject to the outcome of the appeals, with other direction to implement our order dated 12.4.2016 by directing the three Trustees, namely, the petitioner, Respondent No.11 and 3
Respondent No.1 to conduct the day-to-day affairs of the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust, as per our order dated 12.4.2016, and also pass an interim order to restrain the Ex-Chairman from holding a meeting pursuant to the notice dated 28.4.2016 and handing over charge to the alleged Trustees/persons claiming to be the Trustees, namely, Respondent Nos.2 to 10.
In our order dated 12.4.2016, while disbanding the Interim Board, we have specifically held as under:-
"Inasmuch as the status of the petitioner has now been ascertained by the Statutory Authority namely, Assistant Charity Commissioner, we find that the function of the Interim Board need not be continued any further leaving it open for the Trust and its Trustees to take care of its functions. With that view, we disband the Interim Board constituted by our order dated 21st May, 2014, leaving it open for the Trust and its Trustees to take care of its interests and operation."
Our orders, in so many words, is clear and categoric and there is no reason for anyone to treat the disbandment to take place beyond 12.4.2016. Therefore, we do not feel it necessary to pass any further clarification in these applications. However, whatever subsequent events that had taken place can always be challenged by the applicant or by anyone aggrieved by any such said events in the manner known to law before the appropriate forum.
The applications stand disposed of.
We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the controversy except reiterating our order, the crucial part of it we have extracted above.
(NARENDRA PRASAD) (SHARDA KAPOOR) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER