1. Dispute over whether a religious institution constitutes a public or private trust for the purpose of submitting returns under the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
1959 Supreme(SC) 53
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
15th April, 1959.
S.R. DAS, C.J.I., S.K. DAS, P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, K.N. WANCHOO AND M. HIDAYATULLAH, JJ.
Mahant Ram Saroop Dasji, Appellant
Versus
S. P. Sahi, Special Officer-in-charge of Hindu Religious Trusts and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 343 of 1955.
Advocates appeared
L. K. Jha, Senior Advocate, (M/s. B. K. P. Sinha and R. C. Prasad, Advocates, with him), for Appellant; Mahabir Prasad, Advocate-General for State of Bihar (M/s. Ishwari Nandan Prasad and S. P. Varma, Advocates, with him), for Respondents.
Advocates:
B.K.P.SINHA, I.N.Prasad, L.K.JHA, MAHABIR PRASAD, R.C.Prasad, S.P.Varma
B.K.P.SINHA, I.N.Prasad, L.K.JHA, MAHABIR PRASAD, R.C.Prasad, S.P.Varma
The Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950 applies exclusively to public religious trusts and not to private trusts, as evidenced by its internal structure, the nature of its administrative provisions, and its relationship with other public trust legislation.
Headnote:(A) Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950 - Section 2(1) - Section 4(5) - Section 30 - Section 32 - Section 48 - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 92 - Religious Endowments Act, 1863 - Constitution of India - Article 19(1)(f) - Definition of "religious trust" - Whether the Act applies to private religious trusts - The definition of "religious trust" in Section 2(1), though wide, must be read in conjunction with other provisions - Section 4(5) excludes the application of laws that exclusively govern public trusts to "any religious trust" as defined in the Act, indicating that the Act itself is intended to apply only to public trusts (Paras 8, 10) - Provisions regarding the doctrine of cy-pres under Section 30 and the settlement of schemes under Section 32 are characteristic of public trusts and inappropriate for private trusts (Para 10).
(B) Constitution of India - Article 19(1)(f) - Fundamental right to property - If an Act governing public trusts were extended to private trusts, it would raise serious questions regarding the constitutional validity of such restrictions as they might not be reasonable restrictions in the interest of the general public (Para 13).
Facts of the case:
A religious institution and its properties were declared by a competent court to not constitute a public trust. Following the enactment of a state law governing religious trusts, the statutory board demanded returns of income and expenditure. The trustee challenged this, contending that the Act applies only to public trusts and not to private ones, and that the demand interfered with the fundamental right to hold the properties.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the statutory definition of "religious trust" does not include private trusts. The legislative intent, evidenced by the exclusion of other public-trust-specific laws and the nature of the administrative powers granted to the board, confirms that the Act is limited to public religious trusts.
Issues: Whether the provisions of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950 apply to private religious trusts and whether such application would violate the fundamental right to hold property under Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Act applies only to public trusts. This is inferred from Section 4(5), which removes the application of the Religious Endowments Act, 1863 and Section 92 of the CPC (both public trust laws) for "any" trust defined under the Act. Furthermore, the procedural requirements for settling schemes and the application of the cy-pres doctrine are designed for public concerns, not private family endowments.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether the definition of religious trust under the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950, encompasses private religious trusts or is limited to trusts of a public nature. (Para 4 )
3. Analysis of legislative history, the distinction between public and private trusts in Hindu law, and the specific wording of Section 4(5) and other administrative provisions. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 )
4. The definition of religious trust under the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950, applies only to trusts of a public nature and excludes private religious trusts. (Para 11 )
5. Appeal allowed; writ issued quashing the demand for returns and prohibiting interference unless the institution is legally determined to be a public trust. (Para 16 )
6. Does the definition of religious trust under the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950, include private religious trusts?
No. The court held that the definition is confined to religious, pious, or charitable trusts of a public nature, as indicated by the legislative history and the specific wording of Section 4(5). (Para 8 , 11 )
7. What is the essential distinction between a public trust and a private trust under Hindu law?
In a public trust, the beneficial interest is vested in an uncertain and fluctuating body of persons, such as the public at large or a section thereof. In a private trust, the beneficiaries are definite and ascertained individuals. (Para 6 )
8. How does the exclusion of Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure in Section 4(5) help determine the scope of the Act?
Since Section 92 CPC applies exclusively to public trusts, the provision stating it shall not apply to any trust defined under the Act indicates that the Act's definition is also limited to public trusts to avoid redundancy. (Para 8 )
9. Is the power of the Board to determine new objects for a trust under Section 30 applicable to private trusts?
No, because Section 30 allows any Hindu to apply, which is inappropriate for private trusts where only specific beneficiaries have the locus standi to make such an application. (Para 10 )
Judgment
S.R. DAS, CJI.. : This appeal on a certificate granted by the High Court of Patna is from a judgment of the said High Court dated September 13, 1954, in a writ proceeding numbered as Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 39 of 1954 in that court, which the appellant had instituted on an application made under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the circumstances stated below.
2. It was alleged that one Mahatma Mast Ramji, a Hind saint, owned and possessed considerable properties in the district of Monghyr in the State of Bihar. About two hundred years ago, he built a small temple at Salouna in which he installed a deity called Sri Thakur Lakshmi Narainji. This temple came to be known as the Salouna asthal. Mast Ramji died near about the year 1802. He was succeeded in turn by some of his disciples, one of whom was Mahant Lakshmi Dasji. He built a new temple in 1916 into which he removed the deity from the old temple and installed two new deities, Sri Ram and Sita. In 1919 Mahant Lakshmi Dasji died. He left three disciples, Vishnu Das, Bhagwat Das and Rameshwar Das. A dispute arose among these disciples about succession to the gaddi, which was settled sometime in February 1919. By that settlement it was arranged that Vishnu Das would succeed Mahant Lakshmi Das as the shebait and would be succeeded by Bhagwat Das, and thereafter the ablest "bairagi" of the asthal, born of Brahmin parents, would be eligible for appointment as shebait. Bhagwat Das died sometime in 1935 and again a dispute arose between one Rameshwar Das, the youngest chela of Mahant Lakshmi Das, and Ram Saroop Das who is the present Mahant and appellant before us. Rameshwar Das, it appears, filed an application under the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act (XIV of 1920) for a direction upon Mahant Ram Saroop Das to render an account of the usufruct of the asthal. This application was contested by Mahant Ram Saroop Das, who said that the properties appertaining to the Salouna asthal did not constitute a public 1959 S. C. D.F.60(2) & 61(1) trust within the meaning of the provision of the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act (XIV of 1920) and therefore he was not aecountable to any person. Mahant Ram Saroop Das also applied for and obtained permission under S. 5 of the aforesaid Act to institute a suit for a declaration that the Salouna asthal and the properties thereof did not constitute a public trust. Such a suit was brought in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Monghyr who, however, dismissed the suit. Then, there was an appeal to the High Court of Patna and by the judgment and decree passed in First Appeal 10 of 1941 dated March 5, 1943, the High Court gave a declaration to the effect that the Salouna astha1 and the properties appertainining thereto did not constitute a public trust within the meaning of the provisions of the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act (XIV of 1920). Some eight years later, the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950 (Bihar 1 of 1951), hereinafter referred to as the Act, was passed by the Bihar Legislature and received the President s assent on February 21, 1951. It came into force on August 15, 1951. The Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts (one of the respondents before us) was constituted under this Act to discharge in regard to religious trusts other than Jain religious trusts the functions assigned to it under the several provisions of the Act. On November 14, 1952, this Board, in exercise of the powers conferred on it under S. 59 of the Act, asked the appellant to furnish to the Board a return of the income and expenditure of the asthal. The appellant replied by a letter dated December 1, 1952, that the Salouna asthal was a private institution to which the Act did not apply, and also drew the attention of the Board to the judgment and decree of the High Court in First Appeal No. 10 of 1941. The Board, however, gave a reply to the effect that it was not bound by the declaration made by the High Court and asked the appellant to obta
