Bombay High Court

TILARI SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL THR. ITS PRESIDENT. TUSHAR TULASARAM GAVADE AND ORS.versusJOINT CHARITY COMMISSIONER KOLHAPUR DIVISION, KOLHAPUR AND ORS.

Disposal: Allowed

Holding

The court allowed the interim application, granting condonation of delay, subject to a cost deposit.

Summary

The applicants, Tilari Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, sought condonation of a 554‑day delay in filing their first appeal against an order of the Joint Charity Commissioner. They argued there was no mala‑fides and that the explanation required by the impugned order had been submitted, albeit late, and that the respondents lacked locus to invoke Section 41‑E. The respondents contended that the delay was inordinate, the explanation was untimely, and that the applicants had acted against the trust’s interests, justifying the prohibition. The bench examined the submissions, found no mala‑fides, and noted that the consequences of the belated explanation were not specified in the impugned order. Consequently, the court held that the appeal should be heard on its merits rather than dismissed on technical grounds and allowed the interim application for condonation, subject to a cost deposit of Rs.25,000.

Issues considered

Whether a delay of 554 days in filing the first appeal can be condoned.
Whether the respondents have locus standi to invoke Section 41‑E of the applicable Act.
Whether the appeal should be dismissed on technical default despite the belated explanation.

Legislation cited

Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 — s. 41-E

Subjects

condonation of delay
first appeal
Section 41-E
public trust
technical default
interim relief

Judgment

                       1                          61-IA-3726-2025 (C)

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

            INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3726 OF 2025
                             IN
              FIRST APPEAL ST NO. 2613 OF 2025

Tilari Shikshan Prasarak Mandal
through Its President
Tushar Tulasaram Gavade & Ors.                   …...Applicants
       Vs.
Joint Charity Commissioner,
Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur & Ors.               …...Respondents

                           WITH
            INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3727 OF 2025
                             IN
              FIRST APPEAL ST NO. 2613 OF 2025

Tilari Shikshan Prasarak Mandal
through Its President
Tushar Tulasaram Gavade & Ors.                   ......Applicants
       Vs.
Joint Charity Commissioner,
Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur & Ors.               .....Respondents

                                 ...
Mr. Utkarsh Desai i/b Mr. Prashant Bhavake, Advocate for Applicants.
Ms. M. Kulkarni, i/b Mr. Abhijit Adagule, Advocate for the
Respondent No.3.
Mr. Avinash Naik, AGP for Respondent-State.
                                 ...

                  CORAM :     SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
                    DATE :    5TH OCTOBER, 2026.
                        2                            61-IA-3726-2025 (C)

ORDER :
             INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3726 OF 2025


.     Heard both sides.


2.    The Applicant seeks condonation of delay of 554 days in

preferring the First Appeal.


3.    Learned counsel for the Applicant relies upon paragraph Nos.

12 and 13 of the application for condonation of delay. It is submitted

that there are no mala-fides on the part of the Applicants in

preferring the appeal belatedly.


4.    It is further submitted that, in part compliance with the

impugned order, the explanation was tendered, albeit belatedly, but

the same has not been dealt with by the competent authority.


5.    It is further submitted that the Respondents have no locus to

prefer an application under Section 41-E, which aspect has not been

dealt with in the impugned order.


6.    Learned counsel Ms. M. Kulkarni, appearing for Respondent

No. 3, relies upon the affidavit-in-reply to counter the submissions. It

is submitted that there is an inordinate delay from 17.07.2023 to

22.01.2025. The explanation submitted on 09.01.2024 was also
                        3                           61-IA-3726-2025 (C)

beyond the prescribed time. It is further submitted that the

Applicants have indulged in activities detrimental to the interests of

the Trust and, therefore, they have rightly been prohibited by the

impugned order.


7.    I have considered the rival submissions of the parties. I have

gone through paragraphs 7 and 8 of the application. I do not find

any mala-fides or oblique motive on the part of the Applicant in

preferring the appeal belatedly.


8.    By the impugned order, the Applicants were directed to submit

their explanation within 30 days from the date of the impugned

judgment and order dated 17.07.2023. The explanation appears to

have been submitted on 09.01.2024, belatedly. The consequences of

submission of the explanation, or of its belated submission, are not

spelt out in the impugned judgment and order.


9.    I find that it would be appropriate to deal with the appeal on

its own merits rather than rejecting it on technical grounds.


10.   For the reasons stated above, Interim Application No. 3726 of

2025 is allowed in terms of paragraph 15(b), subject to the condition

that the Applicant shall deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards costs
                            4                          61-IA-3726-2025 (C)

with the Bombay High Court, Kolhapur Bench Bar Association Ad-

hoc Committee within a period of three weeks. The details of the

account for payment are as follows:


         Bank Name :         Shree Gajanan Nagari Sahakari
                             Patsanstha, Marya, Patolewadi,
                             Kolhapur.
         Branch         :    Sahupuri, Kolhapur.
         A/c. No.   :       00032010001745.



                                   [ SHAILESH P. BRAHME J. ]


Suresh

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…