Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2011 Supreme(SC) 1007

Supreme Court of India
R.V. RAVEENDRAN & H.L. GOKHALE
Dr. T. Varghese George
Versus
Kora K. George & Others
Civil Appeal No. 6786 OF 2003 with Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 22590-22591 OF 2007 and Contempt Petition (C) No. 435 of 2004
Decided on: 13-10-2011

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:K. Subramanina, Sr. Advocate, E.C. Agrawala, Mahesh Agarwal and Rishi Agrawala, Advocates. For the Respondents:M.S. Ganesh and V. Giri, Sr. Advocate, R. Ayyam Perumal, K. Seshachary, Ms. Shomana Khanna, G. Natarajan, Subramonium Prasad, V.N. Raghupathy, S. Nanda Kumar, Achin Goel, R. Satish Kumar, Deepak Prakash, Usha Nandini, Biju Raman, Mohammed Sadique, Jogy Scaria and Purnima Bhat, Advocates.

IMPORTANT POINT
In view of Sections 11 and 53 of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973, Civil Court is forum non juris to grant declaration of minority status to a school.

Headnote:(a) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Section 92 – Persons having interest in the Trust – One person nominated to the original Trust by the founder himself – Another person brother-in-law of the founder – Third person parent of a student of the institution – They cannot be held to be lacking good intention for the Trust – Entitled to maintain a suit u/s 92. (Para 26)
       AIR 1967 SC 1044 – Relied upon impliedly
       (2002) 8 SCC 481; (1974) 1 SCC 717; AIR 1958 SC 956 – Referred
       (b) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Section 92(2) – Trial court holding the Trust to be a public Trust – Finding left undisturbed by High Court and confirmed by Supreme Court – Trust cannot be claimed a minority Trust. (Para 27)
       (c) Constitution of India – Article 30(1) – Minority character of Trust – Founder a Christian – Three schools run by trust held institutions – High Court recognising secular character of the Trust from declaration in Clause 10 of the declaration made by the founder – Finding not disturbed by High Court – Confirmed by Supreme Court – Parties not assailing the said finding – Cannot now be reopened – Hit by section 11, CPC and principle of “issue estoppel”. (Para 29)
       (2003) 11 SCC 377; AIR 1967 SC 1415 – Relied upon
       (d) Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973 – Section 11 and 53 – Jurisdiction of Civil Court is ousted – Civil Court is forum non juris under the Act – Declaration obtained from Civil Court that three schools run by the Trust are minority institutions – Of no consequence – Cannot determine minority character of the Trust. (Para 30)
       (e) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Section 92 – Court nominating Chairman and Executive Trustee and Correspondent of the Trust – Objection on ground of their not being Christian – Founder himself not nominating persons by religion, but in their ex-officio capacity – Appointments not unjustified. (Para 31)
       (f) Constitution of India – Article 30 – Minority character of an institution – Founder not creating the trust with any restricted benefits for a religious community – Persons belonging to his faith cannot claim exclusive right to administer the trust – Ingredient of establishment and administration must be both by and for a minority community lacking in instant case – Trust is not a minority Trust. (Para 33)
       (1970) 2 SCC 417; AIR 1968 SC 662; (2007) 1 SCC 386 – Relied upon
       1954 (5) SCR 1005; (1980) 2 SCC 478; AIR 1916 P.C. 132 – Distinguished
       Facts of the case:
       The question arising in this case is whether T. Thomas Educational Trust, Perambur, Chennai, is a Minority Educational Trust?
       The further question is whether the Madras High Court was right in treating it as a Public Charitable Trust u/s 92, CPC?
       Finding of the Court:
       there was no error in the impugned judgment of the Division Bench of Madras High Court dated 5.12.2002 on O.S.A 49 of 1995 in holding that T. Thomas Educational Trust is a secular public charitable trust and not a minority institution. The High Court was accordingly justified in framing the scheme under Section 92 of CPC to see to it that the trust is administered in a better way.
       Result: All petitions are dismissed.

Judgment :-

H.L. Gokhale J.

Civil Appeal No. 6786 of 2003 raises the question as to whether T. Thomas Educational Trust, Perambur, Chennai, is in any way a Minority Educational Trust? And if so, whether the Division Bench of the Madras High Court was justified in framing a scheme for the administration of this trust under Section 92 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (`CPC' for short) by treating it as a Public Charitable Trust?

Facts leading to Civil Appeal No. 6786 of 2003 are this wise -

2. OneShri T. Thomas son of Shri Thomas Pappy, of Perambur, Chennai, started a school in Chennai by name `St. Mary's School' sometime in the year 1970. On 4.4.1975, he executed a deed of declaration of a trust by name 'T. Thomas Educational Trust' for the purpose of running of the school on the terms and conditions mentioned therein. In para 2 of this deed he declared the objects of the trust as follows:-

“2. The said Trust shall have the following objects namely –

.a. to run the said St. Mary's School,

.b. torun other Educational Institutions and Institutions allied to Educational Institutions like Research Institutions.

c. to accept donations in any manner from any person or Institutions whether Governmental or quasi Governmental or otherwise, for carrying out the purpose of the Trust.

d. to borrow moneys from banks and/or other credit Institutions and/or individuals and/or public bodies and/or other Governmental or quasi-Governmental bodies, on the security of its properties or otherwise, for the purpose of the Trust.

e. to lease out or sell or mortgage or otherwise deal with any of the properties of the Trust whether moveable or immovable for the purpose of the Trust.”

3. In para 3 he declared that the entire control and management of the Trust including appointment of the Correspondent of the School shall rest in a `Board of Trustee' who shall consist of the following persons namely:-

(a) ThePrincipal of the School (ex-officio)

(b) Headmaster or Headmistress

(d) A member elected from the Parents Association of the School.

(e) A member elected from the Staff Council of the School.

(f) Three members nominated by the above five members, having high standing in the Educational field.

He nominated the First Board of Trustees in para 4. The members thereof were as follows: -

(a) Rev. Fr. G.M. Thomas, B.Sc., L.T., acting Principal of the School.

(b) Mr. Joseph Ebenezer, B.Sc., L.T. Headmaster

(d) Mrs. Molly Thayil, 37, Vyasa Nagar, Madras-39

(e) Mr. J. Devaraj, B.A. (Staff Member)

(f) Mrs. Mary Joshna Thomas, M.A.B.D., Prof. of History, St. Stephen's College, Pathanapuram, Kerela

(g) Mr. D.V. DeMonte, M.L.C., President, Anglo Indian Association, Madras

(h) Pandit M.C. Chandy, Teaching Assistant (Retd.) Madras Christian College School, Madras

4. What Shri T. Thomas declared in para 10 with respect to the income of the School and utilisation of its funds is very crucial for our purpose. This para reads as follows:-

“10. The income from the School or any income or funds pertaining to the Trust shall be exclusively used for the purpose of the Trust including financial assistance to poor and deserving pupils or students irrespective of case, creed or religion.”

(emphasis supplied)

5. Shri Thomas died on16.1.1984, and the trust and the school fell under the management of his wife Smt. Elizabeth Thomas. There were allegations with respect to mis-management of the funds of the institution by her. This led three persons taking interest in the activities of the trust to institute a suit in the Madras High Court under Section 92 of the CPC for framing of a scheme for this trust. They were:-

(i) Shri D.V. DeMonte, a member of the First Board of Trustee,

(ii) Dr. K.P. Natrajan, a parent of a student of the institution, and

(iii) Shri Kora K. George, respondent No. 1 herein, who is husband of the sister of Late T.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2011 Supreme(SC) 1007

Supreme Court of India R.V. RAVEENDRAN & H.L. GOKHALE Dr. T. Varghese George Versus Kora K. George & Others Civil Appeal No. 6786 OF 2003 with Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 22590-22591 OF 2007 and Contempt Petition (C) No. 435 of 2004 Decided on: 13-10-2011

IMPORTANT POINTIn view of Sections 11 and 53 of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973, Civil Court is forum non juris to grant declaration of minority status to a school.

Cases Referred (11)

Supreme Court of India
R.V. RAVEENDRAN & H.L. GOKHALE
Dr. T. Varghese George
Versus
Kora K. George & Others
Civil Appeal No. 6786 OF 2003 with Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 22590-22591 OF 2007 and Contempt Petition (C) No. 435 of 2004
Decided on: 13-10-2011

IMPORTANT POINT
In view of Sections 11 and 53 of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973, Civil Court is forum non juris to grant declaration of minority status to a school.