IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that for a suit under Section 92 of the CPC, it is essential to demonstrate a public charitable trust, a breach of trust, and appropriate relief sought, emphasizing the protective nature of the provision.

JUDGMENT :

RAVI V. HOSMANI, J.

1. Challenging order dated 03.11.2023 passed by Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in Misc. No. 346/2022 under Section 92 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’ for short), this appeal is filed.

2. Sri M.R.Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri Raghu Prasad B.S., advocate for appellants submitted appeal was by petitioners in Misc. No. 346/2022 filed under Section 92 of CPC praying for grant of leave to institute a suit for removal of trustees, appointment of new trustees, administrator and for setting a scheme in respect of respondent no. 1, namely Grama Seva Sangha Trust (“Trust” for short), a public trust managing Dodda Mavalli Bilsilu Maramma Temple (‘temple’ for short) situated at no. 12, Mavalli main road, Mavalli, Bengaluru.

3. It was submitted, petitioners were residents of Mavalli village and devotees of deity ‘Maramma’ and had concern for temple and its properties. It was submitted most of respondents no. 2 to 11 were leading luxurious life even without any avocation, job or business, which clearly signified that they were misusing funds of temple for their own benefits. Hence, with intention to protect temple and its properties, petitioners had sought leave under Section 92 of CPC to file a representative suit. It was submitted, though petitioners had alleged misuse of funds and properties of trust, Trial Court refused to grant leave merely on ground that petitioners had bald allegations without production of documents.

4. It was submitted when allegations made in plaint were with sufficient particulars and plaint was appended with documents, refusal to grant leave would be uncharitable and indicate non application of mind. It was submitted other reason assigned that petitioners were espousing personal cause was without any basis or justification. Nowhere in plaint or petition, petitioners had expressed any personal grievances and had not sought any personal reliefs. It was submitted, reason assigned by Trial Court was by reference to averments in written statement/affidavit and therefore contrary to law.

5. It was submitted examination of merits of suit was not contemplated at stage of grant of leave for filing suit under Section 92 of CPC. Therefore, refusal to grant leave would be contrary to law. To support said submissions, reliance was placed on decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Swami Paramatamanand Saraswati v. Ramji Tripathi, (1974) 2 SCC 695 held as follows:

“14. It is, no doubt, true that it is only the allegations in the plaint that should be looked into in the first instance to see whether the suit falls within the ambit of Section 92 (See Association of R.D.B. Bagga Singh v. Gurnam Singh, AIR 1972 Raj 263 : 1972 WLN 157 : 1972 Raj LW 182, Sohan Singh v. Achhar Singh, AIR 1968 P&H 463 : ILR 1968 Punjab 359 : 1968 Cur LJ 480 and Radha Krishna v. Lachhmi Narain, AIR 1948 Oudh 203 : 1948 OWN 179. But, if after evidence is taken, it is found that the breach of trust alleged has not been made out and that the prayer for direction of the court is vague and is not based on any solid foundation in facts or reason but is made only with a view to bring the suit under the section, then a suit purporting to be brought under Section 92 must be dismissed. This was one of the grounds relied on by the High Court for holding that the suit was not maintainable under Section 92.”

6. In so far as conditions required to be satisfied while seeking leave to institute suit under Section 92 of CPC, reliance was placed on ratio in Ashok Kumar Gupta v. Sitalaxmi Sahuwala Medical Trust, (2020) 4 SCC 321, wherein after referring to various earlier decisions, it was held as follows:

“12. Three conditions are, therefore, required to be satisfied in order to invoke Section 92 of the Code and to maintain an action under the said section, namely, that:

(i) the Trust in question is created for public purposes of a charitable or religious nature.

(ii) there is a breach of trust o