SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Guj) 148

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :K.M.MEHTA
AMBALAL OKARLAL PATEL - Appellant
Versus
FILOMAN PATHUBHAI PATEL - Respondent
SECOND APPEAL 303 of 1986
Decided On : 03/21/2003

Advocates Appeared: A.D.OZA, JASHVANT M.PATEL, K.H.KAJI, KETTY A.MEHTA, M.D.PANDYA, T.A.MAKVANA, TRIVEDI AND GUPTA

Headnote:

Code of Civil Procedure -Section 100 -Appellants original plaintiffs have filed this second appeal, against the judgment and decree, passed by the learned Extra Assistant Judge, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 72 of 1984. The learned Judge by his impugned judgment was pleased to allow the appeal and quashed and set aside the judgment, passed by the learned Civil Judge (S. D.), Bharuch in Regular Civil Suit No. 72 of 1972. Background:in the some American Missionaries established a religious institution (Church) at Valsad for propagation of protestant faith of Christian religion and to establish and manage the churches for the people professing that faith. Gradually their activities were extended and similar institutions came into being. In course of time, these activities were further extended to various other places in the then Bombay State. For administrative facilities and convenience, such local institutions came to be grouped into two categories viz. one (1) comprising of such institutions and another (2) of institutions situated in the Gujarat State area of that State. These institutions were respectively known as the second District Church of Brethren and the First District Church of Brethren. object of the Brethren Church was to propagate the work of the Church of the Brethren in Western India in order to reveal Christ by means of evengelistic, educational, medical, literary, industrial schools, social and charitable activities leading to the establishment of the kingdom of God. Present Controversy: 2. 2 the case in brief which is relevant for the appeal of the plaintiffs –Held IN view of the same, the Second Appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. I confirm the judgment and decree, passed by the learned Extra Assistant Judge, Bharuch in Regular Civil Appeal No. 72/84. In view of the same, the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (S. D.), in Regular Civil Suit No. 72 of 1972 is quashed and set aside. Decree to be termed accordingly. 8. 1 in this matter, learned Senior Counsel has appeared on behalf of the appellant learned Senior Counsel appeared on behalf of the respondents. learned Government appeared on behalf of the Charity Commissioner. All the learned Counsels have very ably assisted this Court in resolving the disputed question of fact and law involved in this appeal. The Court is beholden to all the learned Counsels for the valuable assistance rendered to this Court. 8. 2 before I part with this judgment, I would like to observe as under. A purely religious body is not, as such, a charity. For example, a nunnery. If, however, they do good works of a charitable nature, such as nursing the sick or teaching the ignorant, they are charities even if their motive in doing those good works may be to further their own salvation –Appeal is Dismissed.

K. M. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) AMBALAL Okarlal Patel and others, appellants original plaintiffs have filed this second appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the judgment and decree dated 11th August, 1986, passed by the learned Extra Assistant Judge, Bharuch, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 72 of 1984. The learned Judge by his impugned judgment was pleased to allow the appeal and quashed and set aside the judgment dated 31st March, 1984, passed by the learned Civil Judge (S. D.), Bharuch in Regular Civil Suit No. 72 of 1972.

( 2 ) BACKGROUND OF THE MATTER:in the year 1898 A. D. some American Missionaries established a religious institution (Church) at Valsad for propagation of protestant faith of Christian religion and to establish and manage the churches for the people professing that faith. Gradually their activities were extended and similar institutions came into being at Ankleshwar in Bharuch District and at Jalalpore Town in Navsari Taluka of Valsad District. In course of time, these activities were further extended to various other places in the then Bombay State. For administrative facilities and convenience, such local institutions came to be grouped into two categories viz. one (1) comprising of such institutions situated in the Maharashtra Area of the then State of Bombay and another (2) of institutions situated in the Gujarat State area of that State. These institutions were respectively known as the second District Church of Brethren and the First District Church of Brethren (latter is hereinafter referred to as "the Brethren Church" ). 2. 1 the object of the Brethren Church was to propagate the work of the Church of the Brethren in Western India in order to reveal Christ by means of evengelistic, educational, medical, literary, industrial schools, social and charitable activities leading to the establishment of the kingdom of God. Present Controversy: 2. 2 the case in brief which is relevant for the appeal of the plaintiffs - appellants No. 1 to 4 herein are that, in the year 1970, six denominations of Protestant Christian faith in India decided to merge themselves to form a united Church of North India (`cni for short) for common and better management. One of the uniting denominations functioning in Gujarat was the First District Church of Brethren (hereinafter referred to as `the Brethren Church ). The said Brethren Church was registered in the year 1944 as a Society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (`sr Act for short ). 2. 2 (A) prior to its registration under the BPT Act, the Brethren Church had its Memorandum of Association and Rules and Regulations framed under the SR Act which provided, inter alia, by Rule 4 of the General Rules, that upon winding up or dissolution of the Trust its properties should be transferred to some institution having objects similar to the society, to be determined by the 3/5th vote in the last business session of the society before the time of dissolution. It was stated that in view of section 13 of the SR Act which provided that the society may be dissolved by majority of 3/5th of the members of the society at a general meeting convened for the purpose. 2. 3 after coming into force of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 (`bpt Act for short) in the then State of Bombay, the Brethren Church was registered as a Public Trust at No. E/827 (Bom.) initially with the office of the Deputy Charity Commissioner of Greater Bombay, by considering its Memorandum of Association as its Trust Deed. Under the definition of Public Trust under Sec. 2 (13) of the BPT Act, a society has also been included in the said definition. 2. 4 after the formation of the separate State of Gujarat, the Brethren Church was registered on 22. 6. 60 under the BPT Act at No. EG/643 (Bharuch) with the office of the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Baroda Region, Bharuch. 2. 5 in the Schedule-I of the register of the Public Trust maintained by the Charity Commissioner under Sr. No. EG/643 under the h









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top