Point of Law: Suit filed by the trust against a third party as done in this case, in Court considered opinion would not come within the purview of Section 92 of CPC.

ORDER :

1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

"a) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order Annexure-E passed by the Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC-III, Raichur dated 31.03.2022 in O.S.No.263/2021, in the interest of justice and equity.

b) Issue any writ or order or directions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in circumstances of the case, in ends of justice and equity"

2. The respondent-Janatha Trust, a Public Charitable Trust had filed a suit in O.S.No.263/2021 before the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC-III at Raichur, seeking for a permanent injunction against the petitioners herein and others from interfering with the peaceful possession of the suit land in Sy.No.21 measuring 37 guntas of Rampur village.

3. The petitioners had filed their written statement and subsequently, filed an application under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'CPC') on 20.12.2021 contending that without permission being obtained in terms of Section 92 of CPC, a suit could not have been instituted by a Public Charitable Trust against the petitioners arraying as defendants.

4. The said application came to be dismissed by the Trial Court by holding that the suit having been filed against the third party, there is no requirement of permission under Section 92 of CPC to be taken and as such, dismissed the application in I.A.No. III. It is aggrieved by the same that the petitioners are before this Court.

5. Sri Shivakumar Kalloor., learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the proceedings initiated by the Public Charitable Trust is akin to a representative suit in terms of Order I Rule 8 of CPC and the trust filing the suit on behalf of its beneficiaries and trustees any suit which is filed by a trust would have to satisfy the requirement of Section 92 of CPC and since the allegation is that there is an interference with the property of the trust, the same at the most would amount to a public nuisance and in terms of section 92 of CPC without permission being taken from the jurisdictional District Court acting in its capacity as a parens patriae no suit can be instituted by the public charitable trust against anybody. These aspects going to the very root of the matter inasmuch as the suit itself is not maintainable, admittedly, no permission having been obtained, the trial Court ought to have considered the same and dismissed the suit at the threshold itself. It is on this ground, he submits that the writ petition is required to be allowed.

6. Notice to respondents is dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed.

7. Heard Sri.Shivakumar Kalloor, learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the records.

8. The short point that would arise for consideration is whether a public charitable trust could be required to obtain permission from the jurisdictional District Court in order to file the suit against a third party? Section 92 of CPC reads as under:

"92 Public Charities:(1) In the case of any alleged breach of any express or constructive trust created for public purposes of a charitable or religious nature, or where the direction of the Court is deemed necessary for the administration of any such trust, the Advocate-General, or two or more persons having an interest in the trust and having obtained the 4[leave of the Court], may institute a suit, whether contentious or not, in the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction or in any other Court empowered in that behalf by the State Government within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the whole or any part of the subject-matter of the trust is situate to obtain a decree:

(a) removing any trustee;

(b) appointing a new trustee;

(c) vesting any property in a trustee;

[(cc) directing a trustee who has been removed or a person who has ceased to be a trustee, to deliver possession of any trust property in his possession to the person entitled to the possession of such property];

(d) directing ac