Judgment

Shah, J.-This appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated December 19, 1994 passed in Civil Revision Application No. 497 of 1993 by the Nagpur Bench of High Court of Bombay. By the impugned order, the Court allowed the Revision Application and set aside the order dated 2.4.93 passed by the Additional District Judge, Nagpur in Mis­cellaneous Civil Application No. 575 of 1992 whereby the respondent was required to render accounts in respect of the property referred to in document marked as Exhibit 249.

2. Admittedly, the case has a chequered history. It is the contention of the appellant that on 7.10.1953, a member of the Atba-E-Malak, father of the appellant filed an application before the Registrar under the M.P. Public Trust Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for entering the trust in the register as a public trust. That application was rejected. Finally, a special civil suit No. 143 of 1967 was filed on 26th September, 1967 as provided under Section 8 of the Act for setting aside the findings that the trust was not a public trust. The trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that plaintiff had no locus standi. An appeal being Regular Civil Appeal No. 16 of 1987 was allowed by the Additional District Judge, Nagpur and it was held that the Trust was a public trust. Against that judgment and decree, Second Appeal No. 132 of 1992 was filed before the High Court.

3. In the meantime, the Deputy Charity Commissioner had taken in his register the list of properties of the public trust as per Exhibit 249, the relinquishment deed as public trust properties. As the entry was registered, Respondent filed Contempt Petition No. 178 of 1990 in Civil Appeal No. 498 of 1964 before this Court wherein it was contend­ed that Deputy Charity Commissioner has flouted the directions issued by this Court by Order dated 22nd August, 1966 in Civil Appeal No. 498 of 1964. By Order dated 12.2.91, the Court rejected the said contempt application but for protecting the properties Shri Amiruddin Hassan Noorani Malak (Respondent No. 1) was appointed as Receiver. The Court further directed as under:-

“Since the litigation in respect of the said property is pending in the District Court, it is essential that during its pendency the properties which are stated to belong to the public trust should not be frittered away. With that objective in mind, we had suggested to the parties to evolve a workable formula which would ensure till the disposal of the appeal in the District Court. There was some contro­versy regarding the subject matter of the suit. Fortunately, the trial Court has summed up its conclusions in paragraph 30 of the judgment wherein reference has been made to certain properties which, in the opinion of the trial Court, constituted the subject matter of dispute. We do not express any opinion in this behalf as the District Court is siezed of the controversy, but for the limited purpose of identifying the properties which will be governed by this order, we have referred to paragraph 30 of the Trial Court’s judgment. The learned counsel for the petitioners has very frankly stated that the petitioners will not alienate the properties referred to in paragraph 30 of the trial Court order. He has also consented to act as the Receiver of those properties during the pendency of the appeal in the District Court and render accounts to the District Court every three months. By consent we appoint Shri Amirud­din Hasan Noorani Malak as the Receiver of the properties referred to in paragraph 30 of the trial Court judgment. He will render accounts to the District Court every three months and if any direction is necessary hereafter in regard to the management and administration of the said properties, he will approach the District Judge and seek appropriate orders.” (Emphasis added)

4. Thereafter, by order dated 2nd April, 1993, third Additional Dis­trict Judge, Nagpur directed respondent No. 1, Amiruddin s/o Hasan Nooran