DRISHTI HOSPITALITY CO. PVT.LTD. AND ANR vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. THE OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC PLEADER APPELLATE SIDE AND ORS. — WP/15019/2023
Case under Bombay Public Trust Act 1960 Section 226. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 25th February 2026.
CNR: HCBM010471102023
Filing Number
WP/27993/2023
Filing Date
11-10-2023
Registration No
WP/15019/2023
Registration Date
02-12-2023
Judge
HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH
Coram
HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH
Bench Type
Division
Category
ORDINARY CIVIL ( 30 )
Sub-Category
OTHERS ( 99 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Decision Date
25th February 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
DRISHTI HOSPITALITY CO. PVT.LTD. AND ANR
Adv. KASHMIRA SANGHVI
AMAL MAJMUDAR
Respondent(s)
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. THE OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC PLEADER APPELLATE SIDE AND ORS.
THE CHARITY COMMISSIONER, MUMBAI
Adv. GP WRIT CELL
UNITOUCH CREATION LLP, LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP, MUMBAI
Adv. Jain Law Partners LLP
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH
FOR CIRCULATION
FOR ADMISSION
FOR ADMISSION
FOR ADMISSION
FOR ADMISSION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-02-2024 | FOR CIRCULATION |
| 25-02-2026 | FOR ADMISSION |
| 24-02-2026 | FOR ADMISSION |
| 15-01-2026 | FOR ADMISSION |
| 08-12-2025 | FOR ADMISSION |
Orders
The Bombay High Court rejected Respondent No. 3's oral application seeking extension of time to conclude proceedings before the Charity Commissioner, finding that the amendment application was deliberately filed one day before the court-imposed deadline of April 10, 2026, indicating intent to delay proceedings. The court upheld the Charity Commissioner's decision to decline consideration of the amendment application and ruled that no extension could be granted in the disposed writ petition without a formal interim application, though Respondent No. 3 remains free to pursue separate proceedings to challenge the non-consideration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Bombay High Court rejected Respondent No. 3's oral application seeking extension of time to conclude proceedings before the Charity Commissioner, finding that the amendment application was deliberately filed one day before the court-imposed deadline of April 10, 2026, indicating intent to delay proceedings. The court upheld the Charity Commissioner's decision to decline consideration of the amendment application and ruled that no extension could be granted in the disposed writ petition without a formal interim application, though Respondent No. 3 remains free to pursue separate proceedings to challenge the non-consideration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts