Perfect legal position required
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 31 July 2010
This query is : Resolved
MY QUESTION IS WHETHER THE J.M.F.C. IS NOT BOUND TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF A PERSON MAKING COMPLAINT AGAINST THE TRUSTEES WHOSE NAMES ARE AS ON DATE APPEARING IN SCHEDULE-1 OF BOMBAY PUBLIC TRUST ACT, 1950 UNDER VARIOUS SECTIONS OF IPC, UNDER THE PRETEXT OR CLAIMING TO BE TREASURER OF THE TRUST. THE CHANGE REPORT IS PENDING AND THE ABOVE SAID TRUSTEES ARE CONTESTING THE MATTER AS OBJECTORS. WHETHER J.M.F.C OR THE JUDGE OF SEASONS COURT DO NOT HAVE POWER TO SEND THE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT TO JAIL. THE JUDGE ALSO ASKED THE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT TO SHOW THE DOCUMENTS TO ESTAABLISH HIS BONAFIDE AS THE TREASURER. THE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT DID NOT PRODUCE.
FURTHER THE HON'BLE JUSTICE OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT ALSO QUESTIONED THE RESPONDENTS ADVOCATE ABOUT THE STATUS OF THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINANT. FURTHER DIRECTED THE PETITIONERS ADVOCATE TO MAKE THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINANT AS PARTY TO THE PETITION AND AMEND THE PETITION TO THAT EFFECT. THE SAID DIRECTIONS WERE PERFORMED, THEREAFTER THE RULE IS MADE ABSOLUTE IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONER. NO LEGAL ACTION OR COGNIZNCE IS TKEN BY THE COURTS.
WHAT IS THE REMEDY?
