1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO. 429 OF 2009 1. RAMCHANDRA GHULSARAM NAKSHANE R/O NAVARGAON, TAL MARGAON, DIST YEOTMAL .. PETITIONER/S VERSUS 1. ALLAUDDIN PIRBHAI VIRANI R/O NAVARGAON, TAL MAREGAON, DIST YEOTMAL .. RESPONDENT/S Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Shri J. T. Gilda Adv for petitioner. Shri P. A. Gode Adv for respondents. CORAM: F. M. REIS J. Dated: 27 th JANUARY, 2010. Heard counsel for the appellant and the respondent. This is an appeal preferred by the appellant challenging the common judgment dated 08.04.2009 passed by the learned District 2 Judge Pandharkawda in M. J. C. No. 13 of 2007 where by the appeals preferred by the appellant came to be rejected. Considering the short matter in controversy in the present appeal there is no need to reproduce the facts of the case which have otherwise been elaborately mentioned by the Courts below. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the learned District Judge while disposing of the said appeal held that the election of appellant as well as respondent herein are illegal because there was no subject in the notice for the membership of new Members and that there is no agenda in the Meeting and therefore acceptance of the new members was illegal. It is further held that the proceeding initiated by the appellants were contrary to the orders passed earlier by the Joint Charity Commissioner in judgment dated 23.11.1993. But however the learned counsel submits that the appellants had duly complied with the directions in the said order dated 23.11.1993 and consequently the findings arrived at by the Courts below are contrary to the record and as such the findings are perverse. According to the learned counsel in view of such perverse findings by the Courts below there is a substantial question of law to be considered in the present appeal. 3 On the other hand the learned counsel for the respondent has taken me through the judgment of the learned District Judge and brought to my notice the finding at para 11 wherein the learned District Judge has held that the Joint Charity Commissioner has given a specific finding that the directions given by the Joint Charity Commissioner in the judgment dated 23.11.1993 are not followed and therefore elections held by both the parties are illegal and therefore, in consonance with the judgment dated 23.11.1993 directions are given in the operative part to hold the election. Learned counsel also pointed out the finding of the Joint Charity Commissioner in judgment dated 02.04.2007 at para 11 wherein it has been held that the Resolution dated 15.09.2003 shows that 11 members were allowed to be admitted, their applications were accepted and the membership fees were also accepted on the same day. It is further held that the said members were accepted on the day of the meeting of the executive council and the membership fee was accepted from them on the same day i.e. on 15.09.2003. Learned counsel further brought to my notice the direction in the said earlier order dated 23.11.1993 that the appellant was directed to induct new members in the Meeting in the general body. This fact has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant. 4 Considering the submissions of the learned counsel and on perusal of the impugned judgment I find that the Courts below have appreciated the evidence on record after giving the finding that the induction of the new members were contrary to the directions of the judgment dated 23.11.1993 and there is no error or infirmity in the said judgments. In any case such concurrent findings of facts cannot be reappreciated in Second Appeal. Learned counsel could not point out any perversity in the findings of the learned District Judge. There is no substantial question of law involved in the appeal. As such the Second Appeal stands summarily dismissed. JUDGE svk 5 6 7