Ravindra Shamrao Mandrekar v. Mumbai Cricket Association And ANR

Gaikwad RD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4584 OF 2022 Ravindra Shamrao Mandrekar

...Petitioner

Versus

Mumbai Cricket Association & Anr

...Respondents

Mr Rohaan Cama, with Kyrus Modi, Chandrajit Das, i/b Rashmikant & Partners, for the Petitioner.

Mr RA Dada, Senior Advocate, with AS Khandeparkar, Senior Advocate & VV Warerkar, i/b Warerkar & Warerkar, for Respondent No.1.

CORAM

G.S. Patel & Neela Gokhale, JJ.

DATED:

PC:- 1.

We have the report of the Special Administrators. It is dated 14th March 2023. It was submitted in a sealed cover with a hard drive. The report is taken on record and marked 'X' for identification with today's date.

2.

Mr Cama confirms that the Petitioner has a copy as well. The hard disk can be returned to Mr Salil Shah. Mr Shah is not required to preserve the hard disk.

3.

The Special Administrators engaged the services of Robert Pavrey and Associates,("RPACS") as a Professional to oversee the vote on the prescribed Agenda Items. The Scrutinizer's Report is also appended.

4.

Seven resolutions were placed at the General Body Meeting. The General Body rejected all resolutions proposing forensic audits for various years. The resolutions for adoption of the Treasurer's Report and audited statements of accounts for different years were approved and accepted. This concludes the controversy. 5.

RPACS has submitted a bill of Rs. 1.5 lakhs plus GST. Mr. Dada had previously said that this would be paid by the Mumbai Cricket Association ("MCA"). We have noted this in our previous order.

6.

There remains the question of payments of an honorarium to both Special Administrators Mr Rohan Shah and Mr Salil Shah. While we do realize that any payment that we order is a token, it must nonetheless be paid. Mr Dada submits that an amount of Rs.3 Lakhs be ordered as payment to each of the2but that this should be divided equally between the Petitioner and the MCA. We accept that suggestion. We think it is reasonable. Above all, every Petitioner who comes to Court must realize that these matters are not without consequences, and sometimes those consequences are financial. We do not propose to encourage a feeling that a party can 'take a chance' in court with 'nothing to lose'. If we do not make an

order of sharing of costs, there is nothing to stop every member from repeating this again and again.

7.

The Petitioner and the MCA will pay Rs.1.5 lakhs to each of the two Special Administrators as an honorarium. 8.

The Petition is disposed of with these directions. There will be no other order of costs.

(Neela Gokhale, J) (G. S. Patel, J) Digitally signed by RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Date:

2023.03.16 11:31:59 +0530 RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD