HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
R. P. Mookerjee, Renupada Mukherjee
SATYANANDA BRAHMACHARI - Appellant
Versus
PHANI LAL MOOKERJEE - Respondent
A. F. O. D. 41 Of 1951
Decided On : MAY 12, 1954
CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE - SECTION 92 AND 93 - SUIT FOR PUBLIC TRUST - CONSENT OF COLLECTOR - PREVIOUS SANCTION OF STATE GOVERNMENT - STRICT INTERPRETATION - GENERAL NOTIFICATION INSUFFICIENT - SPECIFIC SANCTION REQUIRED FOR EACH CASE.
Fact of the Case:
Plaintiffs, claiming to be interested in the sheba puja of the famous deity Sri Sri Kalimata of Kalighat, filed a suit under Sections 92 and 93 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) alleging mismanagement and misappropriation of the temple and its associate ones, which were part of a public endowment. The Collector of 24-Parganas had endorsed his consent on the plaint, stating that he had obtained the written consent of the Advocate General as required under Section 93, CPC. The defendants challenged the maintainability of the suit, arguing that the plaintiffs had not obtained the necessary consent.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the consent of the Collector was not valid as it was not specifically authorized by the State Government for the institution of this particular suit. The court interpreted Section 93, CPC, strictly, relying on previous judicial decisions, which held that a general sanction was not enough and that the previous sanction of the Government must be obtained in each case.
Issues: 1. Whether the plaintiffs had obtained the consent required under Sections 92 and 93, CPC, for filing the suit. 2. Whether the Collector's consent to the filing of the suit was valid.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 92(1), CPC, allows the Advocate General or two or more persons interested in a public trust to institute a suit for certain reliefs, provided they obtain the consent of the Advocate General. 2. Section 93, CPC, empowers the Collector or an appointed officer to exercise the powers of the Advocate General outside the Presidency town, with the previous consent of the State Government. 3. The previous consent of the State Government must be obtained in each particular case, and a general sanction is not sufficient. 4. The letter from the Judicial Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, referring to a general notification authorizing the Collector to exercise the powers under Section 92, CPC, did not constitute a specific sanction for the filing of the particular suit.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, holding that the suit was not maintainable as the plaintiffs had not obtained the necessary consent under Sections 92 and 93, CPC.
( 1 ) THE only question raised in this appeal is whether the plaintiffs had obtained the consent required under Sections 92 and 93, Civil P. C. , for filing the present suit. The learned District Judge has held against the plaintiffs. Hence this appeal to this Court.
( 2 ) THE three plaintiffs claimed to be persons interested in the sheba puja of the famous deity Sri Sri Kalimata of Kalighat.
( 3 ) IT is alleged that this temple along with other associate ones are part of a public endowment. They are riot being properly managed. Certain definite allegations are also made about mismanagement and misappropriation.
( 4 ) IN the body of the plaint it is averred that this suit is brought under the provisions of Section 92 read with Section 93, Civil P. C. , and that the written consent of the Collector, 24-Parganas as required therein had been obtained. On the original plaint the Collector, 24-Parganas made the following endorsement:"under Government Order No. 5977-J, dated 11-11-1949, I hereby give consent in writing to the institution of this suit under Section 92, Civil P. C. , by the applicants (1) Sreemat Swami Satyananda Brahmachari (2) Ganapati Sarkar and (3) Parimal Chandra Sen against Phanilal Mukherjee and other shebaits and paladars of the deity Sri Sri Iswari Kalimata Thakurani of Kalighat in the District of 24-Parganas for relief as sought for in the present suit. S. N. Maitra, Collector, 24-Parganas 24-11-1949. "the defendants were originally 13 in number who were described as members of the Executive Committee of the Shebait Sabha constituted by some of the influential shebaits and paladars who were made parties for themselves and for the benefit of all shebaits and paladars in general under the provisions of Order 1, Rule 8, Civil P. C. Various reliefs were claimed including preparation of inventory of the properties of the deity the shebaits to be directed to render accounts, for removing such persons as are found to have defaulted in the work of the sheba puja, committed any breach of trust or are found unfit and to settle a Scheme for the proper management and control of the debuttar properties. It is not necessary for our present purpose to refer in detail either to the allegations as made in the plaint or to the various objections raised in the written statement.
( 5 ) OF the many issues one was--"is the suit maintainable and is it filed in compliance with the terms of Section 93, Civil P. C. ? Have the plaintiffs properly complied with the terms of Sections 92 and 93 of the Code in instituting the present suit?"as this issue concerned the maintainability of the suit it was taken up for hearing as a preliminary issue with the consent of the parties.
( 6 ) IT appears from the records that the connected papers relating to the alleged approval under Section 93, Civil P. C. , were called for from the office of the Collector of the District as also from the office of the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Judicial Department. Only such of the papers as were considered relevant by the parties were marked as exhibits and the rest were returned to the respective offices. It will have to be considered later on whether all the relevant papers have been brought into the record. As stated already the learned District Judge found this issue against the plaintiffs and dismissed the suit on this preliminary issue.
( 7 ) WHEN there are allegations of breach of any express or constructive trust created for public purposes and for certain other reasons Section 92, Civil P. C. , provides that "the Advocate General, or two or more persons having an interest in the Trust and having obtained the consent of the Advocate General, may institute a suit" to obtain a decree for any one or more of the reliefs referred to in that section.
( 8 ) SUB-SECTION (2) of Section 92 of the Code bars the institution of a suit except in conformity with the provisions contained in Sub-section (1) of that section ref
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.