Only legal representatives or appointed administrators may represent a deceased estate in legal matters, and unilateral revocation of an irrevocable trust is void.

JUDGMENT :

(Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury, J.)

1. This second appeal impeaches the judgement and decree passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas in Title Appeal No. 16 of 2015, affirming thereby the judgement and decree passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas in Title Suit No. 261 of 2006.

2. For the sake of convenience the parties will be referred to as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court.

3. Briefly stated, Smt. Mina Mallick as plaintiff filed a suit against Nirmala Chowdhury seeking declaration that the deed of revocation being no. 000224 registered on 3rd June, 2005 in the office of the District Registrar, Barasat is void, inoperative and not binding on the plaintiff and for permanent injunction among other relief.

4. It is contended that the defendant Nirmala Chowdhury was the original owner of the suit property she had no issue and on her own accord she created a trust in respect of the suit property appointing herself and the plaintiff as joint trustees.

5. The said deed of trust was executed on 10th April, 1991 and duly registered in the office of the Registrar of Assurance, Kolkata with the declaration that the trust is irrevocable. The plaintiff, thereafter, came to the suit property and started residing therewith Nirmala Chowdhury. The right title interest that the defendant had in respect of the suit property was conveyed to the trustees and the joint trustees used to enjoy and occupy the suit premises in terms of the deed of trust.

6. The defendant made it clear that in the event of death of the defendant, her husband would have the right to reside over the property and the plaintiff, to look after the husband of the defendant and shall have to observe the birthday of Gurudev of defendant. The defendant of the husband pre-deceased her.

7. On 12th August, 2006 some unknown persons came to the suit property with one Subir Kumar Mukherjee, an Advocate to survey the property and on query it was disclosed that defendant was contemplating sale of a portion of the suit property and she had revoked the deed of trust on 13th June, 2005.

8. According to the plaintiff, the defendant was not competent to deal with the property unilaterally. Notice to that effect was served upon the defendant even the Chairman of Local Municipal Authority was informed. Upon receipt of notice the defendant for some days remained silent but again started disturbing the peaceful possession of the plaintiff.

9. The said suit was contested by defendant Nirmala Chowdhury by filing written statement. She denied the allegations made in the plaint. In her written statement the defendant stated that she executed a deed of family settlement in respect of the property which she acquired by way of gift from her husband. As per terms and conditions delineated in the deed of settlement, the plaintiff had the obligation to look after the defendant and her husband. But immediately after the registration of the document the plaintiffs started doing things in the violation of the terms of the deed. Even she tried to oust the defendant from the suit property, inflicted physical torture upon her. The defendant thus was compelled to revoke the deed of family settlement by a registerd deed of re