Leave under Section 92 CPC is essential to establish jurisdiction for a scheme suit; without it, interlocutory orders are void.

ORDER :

(M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.)

The parties to the lis in the batch of these petitions, are common. The grievance relates to certain orders passed by Principal District and Sessions Judge, Mandya in Miscellaneous No.26 of 2025. Petitioners/defendants in few of the cases and petitioners/plaintiffs, in other cases are before this Court calling in question orders dated 02-05-2025 and 11-06-2025 passed in the aforesaid miscellaneous petition by the District Court.

2. Heard Smt Sruti Chaganti, learned counsel appearing for petitioners in W.P.No.16971 of 2025 and respondents 1 to 3 in W.P.No.17445 of 2025; Smt Maitreyi Krishnan, learned counsel appearing for petitioners in W.P.No.16223 of 2025; and Sri Ashok Haranahalli, learned senior counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 5 in W.P.No.16971 of 2025, for petitioners in W.P.No.17445 of 2025 and for respondent No.1 in W.P.No.16223 of 2025.

3. For the sake of convenience, facts as narrated in Writ Petition No.16971 of 2025 would be narrated.

Sans details brief facts are as follows:-

The 1^st respondent is People’s Education Trust (R), Mandya (‘PES’ for short) which runs several educational institutions. On 11-07-1988 a trust deed is executed by the 1^st respondent/Trust and thereon Rules and Bye-laws are framed. Venting out certain grievances, the petitioners three in number approached the District Court by filing a suit under Section 92 of the CPC , a scheme suit for the purpose of framing a Scheme for proper governance and administration of the trust. Along with the plaint, an application is filed seeking leave to institute the suit. Another application in I.A.No.II is preferred under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC seeking order of restraint restraining the Trust and its Members or the nominated President of the Trust from functioning or continuing as such for any further period without being elected by way of secret ballot. The said application is preferred on 21-03-2025. On 28-03-2025, it appears that a resolution is passed by the trustees continuing the 2^nd respondent as the President and making the same outcome of the subject proceedings instituted invoking Section 92 of the CPC .

4. An application again is preferred in I.A.No.IV of 2025 under Section 151 of the CPC seeking a direction to conduct elections by a secret ballot. All these applications are pending. The concerned Court by its order dated 02-05-2025 passes an interim order constituting an ad hoc committee consisting of all the trustees for governing the trust and a direction issued to respondents 2 and 5 to submit daily reports to the Court and restraining them from using their designation as President and Secretary. A writ petition comes to be filed in Writ Petition No.16223 of 2025 seeking modification of the interim order dated 02-05-2025 to delineate the working procedure for the ad hoc committee and restraining respondents 2 and 5 from taking decisions as President and Secretary of the Trust. After service of copy of the writ petition, the matter was listed before the Court on 06-06-2025. The concerned Court then directs the matter to be listed on 11-06-2025. On 11-06-2025 on the score that a writ petition, as aforesaid is pending and no order is passed in the writ petition or notice being issued, the Court modifies the order. The modification of the order is challenged in the subject writ petition. The very order passed on 02-05-2025 as modified on