Rev. Charles Samraj. N vs. Rt. Rev. Timothy Ravinder Dev Pradeep

ITEM NO.61 COURT NO.11 SECTION XII

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

CONMT.PET.(C) No. 318-319/2022 in SLP(C) No. 4187-4188/2022

ADV. N. NESA MERLIN Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

REV. CHARLES SAMRAJ. N & ORS. Respondent(s)

([ONLY IA NOS.76013 AND 76014 of 2022 in SLP(C)Nos.4187-88 of 2022 ARE LISTED UNDER THIS ITEM.]

(IA No. 92452/2022 - PERMISSION TO PLACE ADDITIONAL FACTS AND GROUNDS)

WITH

*SLP(C) No. 4187-4188/2022 (XII) (*IA No. 76014/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 76013/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 122181/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

Date : 19-09-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI

For Parties	Mr. Yatindra Singh, Sr. Adv.
	Mr. Azhar Assees, Adv.
	Ms. Pallavi Pratap, AOR
	Ms. Prachi Pratap, Adv.
	Mr. P. Pratap, Adv.
	Mr. Akhilesh Sudhakar, Adv.
	Mr. A. Karthik, AOR
	Ms. Smrithi Suresh, Adv.
	Mr. Saaketh Kasibhatla, Adv.
	Ms. Sreepriya K., Adv.
	Mr. Arsh Khan, Adv.
	Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv.
	Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv.
	Mr. Akhil Abraham Roy, Adv.
	Mr. Vijay Valsan, Adv.

Mr. Kishan Datta, AOR

Mrs. V. Mohana, Sr. Adv. Mr. B. Ragunath, Adv. Mrs. N. C. Kavitha, Adv. Mr. Sriram P., AOR

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

Heard on IA Nos. 76013 of 2022 and 76014 of 2022.

Having regard to the submissions made, IA No.76013 of 2022, as moved by CSI Engineering College for impleadment is granted, subject of course, to all just exceptions and while providing that the impleaded party shall otherwise not be entitled to make any submissions which might be in enlargement of the scope of the petitions pending before this Court in this matter.

So far as the prayer made by the impleaded party for directions in IA No. 76014 of 2022 is concerned, though the same is opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in SLP(C) No. 4187-4188 of 2022 as also the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Contempt Petition (C) No. 318-319 of 2022 but, having regard to the submissions made in the applications, without any comment on any other averment taken in these petitions, and only in the interest of the administration and functioning of the college concerned, we allow the applicant college to change its authorized signatory for operation of the bank accounts mentioned in paragraph 2 of the application.

It is, however, subject to the condition that all the transactions made in those accounts shall be placed before this Court fortnightly; and the accounts shall be operated essentially for the purpose of day-to-day management of the college and to meet

2

with the necessary expenditure, like payment of salary/wages and other administrative expenses, including litigation expenses.

It is also made clear that this order, passed in the peculiar circumstances of the case, shall not invest the applicant college or any of the authorized signatory with any other right; and all the rights and liabilities of the parties shall remain subject to further orders to be passed by this Court in the pending matters.

(SNEHA DAS) (RANJANA SHAILEY) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH)