ORDER

Leave granted.

2. One T. Rajamannar (hereinafter referred to as "the testator"), who was possessed of many properties, executed a Will on 21st of January, 1967. Property Nos. 178/79 and 180 China Bazar Road, and 3, Hanumantharayar Koil Street were to be converted into a trust which was to be administered by the wife of the testator, Smt. Ruthi Rajamannar, Shri T. Ramachandran, Shri C. Radhakrishnan Chetty and Shri Viswanathan. The remaining properties of the testator were to be given to his wife Smt. Ruthi Rajamannar. A trust deed was executed on 22nd August, 1969. The main object of the said trust was to find out ways and means to provide shelter for "pavement dwellers" in the city of Madras. The board of trustees was given the absolute powers over the properties including the power to lease or mortgage or alienate in any manner whatsoever as it considered fit and proper.

3. Trustees were given the powers to construct or sell the trust properties and also to put up tenements for the pavement dwellers in and out of the sale proceeds and provide shelters to them with such terms and conditions as they deemed fit and proper from time to time. The trustees were also given the power to utilise the money realised by rents and sales for other charitable purposes which they considered proper.

4. The Will was probated and the properties in question were handed over to the trust. The trust property was fetching a rent of Rs. 6,000/- per month. The board of trustees, being of the opinion that with the sale proceeds of the properties, they could create more income for achieving the objects of the trust, sold property No. 128, NSC Bose Road, Madras (which was one of the trust properties) to various third parties. The sale of the said property by the trust to the third parties has not been challenged in any proceedings.

5. An agreement to sell was entered into between the trustees and the appellants for sale of property No. 124, NSC Bose Road, Chennai, again a part of the trust property. In pursuance of the said agreement to sell, the sale was effected on 10th of September, 1991. After the purchase of properties, the appellants filed RCOP 3183/91 against the tenants for the purpose of fixing fair rent. There were certain other litigation to the same effect with which we are not concerned, hence no reference is being made for the same.

6. In the year 1992, sub-tenants filed OS 9180/92 on the file of the city civil court Madras, seeking restraining the appellants from entering the property and demolishing the same and from executing the order of eviction passed against the tenants. The said suit was dismissed. In the year 1994, another civil suit No. 1031/94 was filed by the sub-tenants for injunction along with application for ad interim injunction. The said suit was dismissed on 22nd of November, 1994 by a learned single judge of the High Court in exercise of his jurisdiction on original side. The appeal preferred against the said judgment was also dismissed. The third suit i.e. civil suit No. 831/95 was filed by certain persons claiming to be the pavement dwellers in the High Court of Madras, inter alia alleging that the trustees had committed breach of trust. Prayer for setting aside the sale deed in favour of the appellants and other reliefs similar to the one claimed in the present suit was made. This suit was dismissed on 30-4-1997. This order became final.

7. The fourth suit (present suit) was filed under section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, inter alia, alleging that the plaintiffs being the pavement dwellers, were filing the suit. The delay in filing the suit was explained by saying that due to poverty, illiteracy, lack of cooperation, finance and proper legal assistance they could not file the suit earlier. It was alleged that the trustees had committed a serious breach of trust and had failed to fulfil the conditions of the Will and implement the objects of the trust. Along with the suit an interim application under order