ORDER :

K.G. Balakrishnan, CJI. - Leave granted.

2. Respondents 1 to 13 are represented through respective counsel.

3. Heard both sides.

4. The appellant herein is the plaintiff in Suit No. 1997 of 2006 pending before the City Civil Court, Mumbai. The appellant is one of the Trustees of Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust and according to the averments in the plaint, defendants 2 to 9 are the other Trustees of the said Trust. Four resolutions were passed by the Board on 29th April, 2006. Appellant herein claims that she is seriously prejudiced by resolution No. 3 which is to the following effect :-

"Resolved that Mrs. Charu Kishor Mehta shall not interact or communicate with employees and/or consultants of the Lilavati Hospital and Research Centre and/or the trust save and except through the Board of trustees of the Trust, and employees and/or consultants be and are hereby informed that they do not have to take into account any instructions directly given by Mrs. K.Mehta to them." Shri Fali S.Nariman, learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that the Board of Trustees had no authority to pass such a resolution and by virtue of this resolution, the appellant is completely excluded from the management of the hospital and research institute, which is the primary object of the Trust. Learned counsel for Respondents 11 to 13 supported the said contention.

5. On the other hand, Shri Harish N.Salve, learned senior counsel and other counsel appearing for respondent nos.1 to 10 supported the resolution and contended that the Resolution had to be passed because of the situation created by the appellant. After hearing the arguments on both sides, we find that there are serious disputes between the parties which ultimately may cause serious difficulties in the running of the hospital, which is under the management of the Trust. In view of the present circumstances, as a temporary measure, we direct that Dr. Narendra Trivedi, Vice-President of the Leelavati Hospital and Dr. K. Ramamurthy, Senior Consultant in that hospital, shall be in-charge of the hospital of the day to day running of the Hospital and Research Institute. These two Administrators will take all decisions relating to the administration of the hospital. They shall give a report to the Board of Trustees every two weeks and any directions by the Board of Trustees are to be issued to these two Administrators only in the form of resolutions and not individual instructions by any Trustee. A copy of the report of resolution shall also be furnished to the appellant and if she is in any way aggrieved by the directions issued by the Board, she would be at liberty to seek appropriate direction from the City Civil Court, Mumbai where the suit is pending.

6. We direct the City Civil Court, Mumbai to take up the suit No. 1997 of 2006 at an early date and dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible at least within a period of six months. It is clarified that this interim arrangement is in substitution of the order passed by the High Court.

7. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above.

8. No costs.