1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.150 OF 2009. (Ramrao Kawathale and Ors. Vs. Mallikarjunappa Bidwe and Ors.) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 7th January, 2010. ... 1) Heard Mr.Natu for the appellant. 2) For the orders to be passed in the present proceedings, presence/hearing to the respondent is not warranted. 3) The plaintiffs/appellant claim to be members of Mahatma Basweshwar Education Society, Latur, filed Regular Civil Suit No. 376 of 1997 against the original defendant no.1 to 48, seeking declaration against the defendants and injunction. Learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Latur, after framing preliminary issues, by order dated 10th January, 2007 dismissed the suit by holding that it had no jurisdiction. The said decision was challenged by the present appellants before the District Judge. The learned District Judge considered that Civil Court has no 2 jurisdiction and directed to present the plaint before the competent authority. This order is subject to challenge in the present appeal from order. 4) Section 80 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 contemplate specific bar of Civil Court concerning any question which is or which could have been decided under the provisions of Bombay Public Trusts Act. It is pertinent that the controversy relates to the management of the trust including change report. All these aspects need to be addressed only by the competent authority, ie. either Assistant Charity Commissioner or Joint Charity Commissioner. Even an appeal is provided before the District Judge against such orders. The nature of controversy, having highlighted before the learned District Judge, he was justified in directing return of the plaint to the plaintiffs for its presentation to the proper Court. No illegality or perversity in the order. The Appeal from Order sans merit, it is dismissed. No costs. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/AO150.09