1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO. 631 OF 2007 Prabhakar Uttamrao Thuse vs. Ganesh D. Hutke & Ors. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. JANUARY 10, 2008. Heard Shri Sharma, learned counsel, who was heard yesterday and also today. He vehemently argues that the trial Court as also the appellate Court have only cursorily considered the pleadings and evidence without in depth examination of Scheme of Sections 50 and 51 of the Bombay Public Trust Act. He argues that in relation to nature of dispute raised in plaint, it is apparent that Civil Court alone has got jurisdiction in the matter and Sections 50 and 51 of Bombay Public Trust Act, are totally irrelevant in controversy raised. He further argues that this Court should therefore issue at least issue notice so as to evaluate his arguments on merit after hearing other side. With his assistance, I have perused both the judgments and I have perused the plaint as filed. The perusal of judgments 2 reveal that in Schedule-I name of present appellant as also some of the defendants appear as trustees. The plaint shows that there are two rival groups and two change reports filed by them against each other are pending. It also shows that according to plaintiff, there are two School Committees functioning and one of the School Committees of which defendant No.1 is a Secretary has also made some appointments which are approved by the Education Officer. Shri Sharma, learned counsel contends that in view of this position, the interests of trust are being prejudiced and the Court therefore must interfere and restore the legal body to its seat so as to take care of those interests. He further argues that decision on change report proceedings will take years together and till then the interests of trust would continue to suffer. However, in Bombay Public Trust Act itself, there are various provisions which permit the appellant to file appropriate proceedings seeking appropriate directions before the authorities functioning thereunder. From provisions of Sections 79 and 80 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, it is also clear that 3 questions to be decided by the authorities under the said Act cannot be considered by the Civil Court at all. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter and I do not find any substantial question of law arising in the matter. However, the appellant is at liberty to approach the appropriate forum for ventilation of his grievances. Second Appeal is dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.