1 Wp no.4196/10 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.4196 of 2010 Kumar Goraknath Shinde ... Petitioner versus Robert Moses ... Respondent ... Mr. A.Y. Sakhare, Sr. Counsel with Nikita Trivedi i/b YKS Legal for the petitioner. Mr.R.V. Govilkar for the respondent. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATED : 19th July 2010 P.C. 1. Heard. 2. By this petition, petitioner challenges the order dated 26 April 2010 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Satara dismissing the petitioner’s appeal against an order dated 11 March 2010 passed by the trial Court dismissing the application for injunction. 3. The petitioner filed a suit against one Mr.Robert Moses who appears to be a Manager of Vider Church Ministries (a registered public trust) (hereinafter referred to as “the Trust”) for an injunction 2 Wp no.4196/10 disturbing the petitioners’ possession over the suit property. The suit property is a property of the trust. The petitioner claims to be in possession of the property of the trust under a leave and license agreement dated 6 January 2010. The leave and license agreement is executed by Mr.Manoj K. Chakranarayan. Counsel for the respondent submits that at the time of the execution of the agreement, Manoj Chakranarayan was not a trustee of the trust. Counsel for the respondent produces for my inspection certified copy of the Register of Public Trusts maintained by the office of the Charity Commissioner which shows that Manoj Chakranarayan was not a trustee of the trust. Consequently, Manoj Chakranarayan had no authority to grant a licence on behalf of the trust and the trustees. 4. Mr.Govilkar, learned counsel for the respondent further submitted that the suit has not been filed against the trust or trustees and such a suit is not maintainable. The suit has been filed only against Robert Moses who is only a Manager of the Trust. Since the trustees are not the parties to the suit, an order of injunction could be granted against the trustees through the Manager. Submission is accepted. In the circumstances, I see no error committed by the two courts below in refusing the injunction. Writ Petition is rejected summarily. (D.G. KARNIK,J.)