https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170091 Section 36 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act was construed as regulating voluntary dispositions by trustees and not a Civil Court sale in execution of a decree, so the trust property sale was not invalid on that ground. Section 56B did not require notice to the Charity Commissioner because enforcement of a mortgage against trust property was not treated as a proceeding involving a question affecting a public religious or charitable purpose. Relief under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC was unavailable because the required deposits were not strictly made, and an agreement to defer or abandon the claim did not amount to actual satisfaction of the decree-holder's entitlement. The text also reiterates that a Single Judge cannot disregard binding coordinate or superior precedents; any departure must be left to a larger Bench. en-us Tue, 05 Sep 1967 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 May 2015 15:16:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170091 Section 36 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act was construed as regulating voluntary dispositions by trustees and not a Civil Court sale in execution of a decree, so the trust property sale was not invalid on that ground. Section 56B did not require notice to the Charity Commissioner because enforcement of a mortgage against trust property was not treated as a proceeding involving a question affecting a public religious or charitable purpose. Relief under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC was unavailable because the required deposits were not strictly made, and an agreement to defer or abandon the claim did not amount to actual satisfaction of the decree-holder's entitlement. The text also reiterates that a Single Judge cannot disregard binding coordinate or superior precedents; any departure must be left to a larger Bench. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 05 Sep 1967 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170091