1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Second Appeal No. 299 of 2009 1. ALLAUDDIN PIR BHAI VIRANI R/O NAVARGAON, TAH. MAREGAON DIST YTL .. PETITIONER/S VERSUS 1. RAMCHANDRA GHULARAM NAXANE R/O NAVARGAON, TAH. MOREGAON, DIST YTL .. RESPONDENT/S - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. Prashant Gode, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. J.T. Gilda, Advocate, for the respondent. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : AUGUST 27 , 2009 . Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The appellant had filed Change Report No. 206/2003 before the Assistant Charity Commissioner, so also the respondent had filed yet another Change Report bearing No. 239/2003 before the authority. Both the Change Reports were rejected by the order dated 14/7/2006. Both the parties preferred appeals against the order passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner on 14/7/2006, but the said appeals were rejected by the Joint Charity Commissioner. Applications were filed before the District Judge. The learned District Judge, however, by the impugned judgment dated 2/4/2007, dismissed the applications filed by the appellant as well as the respondent. The judgments passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner and the District Judge are challenged in the instant second appeal. 2 It is submitted on behalf of the appellant by the learned counsel that the Joint Charity Commissioner could not have directed the Vice President of the Trust to call a meeting of the trustees/members of the Governing Body and invite applications for membership. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, as per the Memorandum of Association of the Trust, it was the Secretary who was empowered to call the meetings of the members of the Managing Committee and the Joint Charity Commissioner could not have directed the Vice President to call the meeting and to enroll the members. Shri Gilda, the learned counsel for the respondent, however, supports the judgments passed by both the Courts and submits that such directions were already issued in Appeal Nos. 8/1993 and 9/1993 by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Nagpur, in the earlier round of litigation between the parties, by the judgment dated 23/11/1993. The said judgment was challenged by the appellant before the learned District Judge, but the order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner in these appeals was confirmed. The notices were issued by the Vice President in accordance with the orders which were passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner and confirmed by the District Judge, and it was found in the present proceedings that the directions issued by the Joint Charity Commissioner in Appeal Nos. 8/1993 and 9/1993 were not followed and, therefore, both the Change Reports bearing Nos. 206/2003 and 239/2006 were liable to be rejected. By the judgments which are challenged in this second appeal, according to the learned counsel for the respondent, the authorities have merely 3 ordered that the elections be held in accordance with the directions issued in Appeal Nos. 8/1993 and 9/1993 as they were not strictly followed. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a perusal of the orders passed in the earlier round of litigation, i.e. Appeal Nos. 8/1993 and 9/1993, as also the orders passed by the District Judge in the same proceedings, along with the judgments of the Joint Charity Commissioner as well as the District Judge challenged in this appeal, it is clear that the Joint Charity Commissioner and the learned District Judge did not commit any error in directing the Vice President to call the meeting and to enroll the members. The judgment passed in Appeal Nos. 8/1993 and 9/1993 had attained finality and since the directions issued by the Joint Charity Commissioner in that judgment were not followed, the necessary directions were issued by the Joint Charity Commissioner in this case. In the aforesaid background, the submission made on behalf of the appellant that the directions are contrary to the provisions of the Memorandum of Association, is liable to be discarded in view of the fact that the judgment in Appeal Nos. 8/1993 and 9/1993 has attained finality. No substantial question of law arises in this second appeal. Hence, the second appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE RMP