Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
UDAY UMESH LALIT, VINEET SARAN, JJ.
ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA & ANR. – Appellants
Versus
M/S SITALAXMI SAHUWALA MEDICAL TRUST AND OTHERS – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 1917 of 2020; (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 21306 of 2019)
Decided on : 03-03-2020
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 92 - Applicability - In case of Trust created for public purposes of a charitable or religious nature; breach of trust or where a direction of Court is necessary in administration of such a Trust; and relief claimed is one or other of the reliefs as enumerated in section 92 - Instantly Trust is created for public purpose and is charitable in nature - Plaint making it out that framing a proper scheme for administration of the Trust through competent persons for proper and effective administration of the Trust is necessary - In that context plaintiff 1, a medical doctor associated with the Trust from inception and now removed, sought to be included in the Trustees - Relief prayed for cannot be said to be in the nature of vindicating personal rights of the first plaintiff - All three conditions for applicability of section 92 satisfied. (Para 13, 14, 16)
Facts of the case:
Original Suit was filed by the present appellants wherein it was elaborated that the 4th defendant - brother of appellant No.1 who did not have any medical qualification or any expertise to run the hospital and manage the Trust had been in control of the Trust and the objects of the Trust were not getting fulfilled; and that the appellants were sought to be removed from the board of trustees.
Along with the aforesaid Suit, IA No. 1416 of 2012 was filed by the appellants seeking leave to institute the Suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The District Judge granted leave under Section 92 of the Code. Soon thereafter Respondent No.2 herein filed IA No. 1435 of 2012 seeking revocation of leave granted to the appellants. The District Court dismissed IA No. 1435 of 2012.
The respondents challenged the aforesaid decision of the District Court by filing Civil Revision being C.R.P. (PD) No.2708 of 2013 before the High Court which was allowed.
Finding of the Court:
Relief prayed for cannot be said to be in the nature of vindicating personal rights of the first plaintiff. Trial court rightly granted leave u/s 92.
Result : Appeal allowed.
The legal document discusses the conditions under which a suit can be instituted under Section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code concerning public charitable trusts. The key points are as follows:
The trust must be created for public purposes of a charitable or religious nature, and the suit should be brought in a representative capacity to protect the interests of the beneficiaries (!) (!) .
Conditions for invoking Section 92:
The relief sought must fall within the enumerated reliefs such as removing or appointing trustees, vesting property, settling schemes, or directing accounts and inquiries (!) (!) (!) .
Suit's purpose and character:
The suit should be of a representative nature, acting in the interests of the beneficiaries rather than for individual or private rights (!) (!) .
The importance of the suit's character:
The reliefs requested should be consistent with protecting the trust's public purpose rather than resolving personal disputes (!) (!) .
Application to the case:
The primary relief sought was to frame a proper scheme of administration and to appoint trustees from the medical profession and the public, which aligns with protecting the public purpose of the trust (!) (!) .
Court's decision:
In summary, a suit under Section 92 is permissible when it involves a public charitable trust, there is a breach or need for court intervention in trust administration, and the reliefs sought are aimed at protecting or improving the public purpose of the trust. Private interests or personal rights, unless they are inextricably linked to the public trust's management, generally do not qualify for such suits.
JUDGMENT :
Uday Umesh Lalit. J.
Leave granted.
2. This appeal challenges the final judgment and order dated 30.04.2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in C.R.P. (PD) No.2708 of 2013.
3. Original Suit No.566 of 2012 was filed by the present appellants in the Court of the District Judge, Coimbatore stating basic facts as under:-
"III. The 2nd plaintiff is the wife of the 1st plaintiff. The 1st plaintiff is the elder son of defendants 2 & 3. The 4th defendant is the younger son of defendants 2 & 3 and the 5th defendant is his wife. The 6th defendant is the daughter of defendants 4 & 5. The 7th defendant is son in law of the family and he has married the sister of 1st plaintiff and the 4th defendant. The plaintiffs are Trustees of the 1st defendant Trust and are persons having interest in the affairs of the Trust and are filing the present suit for framing a scheme for the administration of the 1st defendant Trust, which is a Public Charitable Trust.
(IV) The 2nd defendant settled down in Coimbatore in 1959 and he was managing the firm called M/s India Roller Flour Mills. The 1st plaintiff was academically a good student and he secured admission on merit in medical college and he graduated from Coimbatore Medical College completing MBBS. He pursued his studies further in post-graduation and completed his M.S. from Madras Medical College, Chennai, and is thus a qualified surgeon who has graduated from the Madras University.
(V) Taking note of his future and his carrier as a Doctor, the 2nd defendant decided to construct a hospital, so as to enable the 1st plaintiff to carry on his profession. However, the hospital was envisaged as a charitable hospital. The 2nd defendant as author of the trust established the 1st defendant Trust, M/s Sitalaxmi Sahuwala Medical Trust, under registered Trust Deed dated 09.04.1980. A copy of Deed of Trust is produced herewith and the original is with the 2nd defendant as also the rest of the documents.
(VI) The objects of the Trust are set out in Clause I which briefly are to establish, maintain and render financial assistance and donations by establishing and assisting running of a hospitals, surgical homes; health trainings, nursing homes, maternity homes and dispensaries and to equip the hospitals and provide accessories and instruments etc.
(VII) The plaintiff respectfully states that the 1st defendant Trust was established with the aim and object of providing medical aid to the needy citizens. This was contemplated taking note of the fact that the 1st plaintiff who became a qualified medical practitioner would look after the institution and administer the hospital where a part of the hospital can be run for charity and the 1st plaintiff can have his consultations and in patients admitted to serve the people in society.
(VIII) It is significant that the four trustees appointed under the Deed of Trust are both the plaintiffs and defendants 2 & 3 and they have been appointed for life. The 2nd defendant is the Managing Trustee and the 1st plaintiff was appointed as the Joint Managing Trustee, vide Clause 10.
(IX) There was an amendment to the Trust Deed dated 09.04.1980 by another deed dated 23.03.1981. In addition to the objects, further objects for providing free education and conducting orphanages and help poor people perform marriages were introduced to the objects. But nothing of these additional charities were ever performed.
(X) By another deed dated 15.03.1985, further objects were introduced to the Deed of Trust which have no relevance to the original objects. There was also an amendment to the Trust Deed by a registered deed dated 24.11.1986 providing for borrowing powers. (XI) The Trust purchased land measuring 33 Cents in Cowly Brown Road by a sale deed dated 08.04.1985 and a hospital was constructed and it was established by the 1st defendant trust in 1987-88. The 1st plaintiff was looking after administration of this hospital till the year 2003-04. The subsequent turn of events d
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
