- 1 - 6850 rng IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6850 OF 2008 Umberje Chawl Tenants Kalyankari Sangh..Petitioner vs 1. Vaishva Umberje Siddeshwar Trust ..Respondents Mr.T.D.Deshmukh for Petitioner CORAM: A.S.Oka, J DATE: 8th October, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The challenge in this writ petition under Article 227 of the constitution of India is to the order dated 14.8.2008 passed by the learned Joint Charity Commissioner. An application was made by the 1st respondent-trust under section 36 of the Bombay Public Trust Act. 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) for grant of permission to sell the trust property. By the impugned order, the learned Joint Charity Commissioner permitted the 1st respondent to sell the trust property to the 2nd respondent. - 2 - 6850 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out that the petitioner is a trust which had submitted an offer of Rs.1,30,00,000/-. He pointed out that under the impugned order dated 19th August, 2008, time was granted to the 2nd respondent for deposit of the balance consideration amount out of the total consideration of Rs. 1,30,00,000/-. He pointed out that time of three months fixed by the order expired but, the 2nd respondent did not deposit the amount. He submitted that extention was granted from time to time and the deposit of balance consideration was made in February 2009. He submitted that when the 2nd respondent-purchaser failed to pay the balance consideration within the time stipulated under the impugned order, the time stipulated could not have been extended and that the Joint Charity Commissioner ought to have invited fresh bids. 3. I have carefully considered the submissions. It must be noted here that during the pendency of the application under section 36, bids/offers were invited. An amount of 10% of the bid amount was required to be deposited as a - 3 - 6850 security deposit along with the bids. The 2nd respondent offered a bid of Rs.1,30,00,000/-. The petitioner by an application dated 31st July, 2008 had sought permission to deposit only 5% of the amount instead of required 10%. The said permission was denied. In fact the bid/tender was not submitted by the petitioner within the stipulated time. There was a further order passed on 14.8.2008 by the Joint Charity commissioner on the application of the same date made by the petitioner. The said application was for accepting the offer of the petitioner to purchase the trust property for Rs.1,30,00,000/-. In the said application a prayer was made for deposit of only 5% of the amount instead of 10%. The said application was rejected by the Joint Charity Commissioner by an order dated 14.8.2008. The learned Charity Commissioner recorded that the petitioner ought to have submitted the bid on or before 31.7.2008 which has not been done. Even along with application dated 14th August, 2008, the petitioner did not submit the bid along with 10 % deposit. Even by the said subsequent application at Exhibit 51, the petitioner did not offer to deposit 10 % of the bid amount. - 4 - 6850 4. Now, the sale deed has been executed in favour of the 2nd respondent. No interference is called for with the impugned order at the instance of the petitioner considering the conduct of the petitioner, Writ Petition stands rejected. A.S.Oka, J - 5 - 6850