Back
2026 Supreme(Guj) 229
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.C. DOSHI, J.
Kishanji Maganji Thakore & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Collector Of Baroda & Ors. – Respondents
R/First Appeal No. 1611 Of 1991 With R/First Appeal No. 1517 Of 1991 With Civil Application (For Direction) No. 1 Of 2023 With Civil Application (For Production Of Additional Evidences) No. 2 Of 2023 With R/First Appeal No. 1612 Of 1991 With R/First Appeal No. 1613 Of 1991 With R/First Appeal No. 1614 Of 1991
Decided On : 17-06-2026
Important Points
Subject
Property Law - Public Trust and Charitable Endowments
Act Referred
GUJARAT LAND REVENUE CODE: S.135(d)
BOMBAY LAND REVENUE CODE: S.135(d), S.37(2)
SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT: S.19
Headnote
(B) Trust Property - Determination of ownership - Once a property is established as an endowment for a public institution, it remains as such unless formally discontinued or converted according to law. The administrative character of the property is not lost by virtue of an erroneous entry in revenue records. (Paras 13, 22)
(C) Bona fide Purchaser - Defence of - Requirements for protection - To claim the status of a bona fide purchaser, the transferee must establish that they purchased for value, acted in good faith, and had no actual or constructive notice of the prior equitable claim on the property. Willful abstention from inquiry or gross negligence precludes such status. (Paras 35, 36, 37)
Facts of the case:
Appellants challenged an administrative order declaring certain lands to be properties belonging to a public trust. The primary contention was that the property belonged to a private estate and that the inquiry held decades after the trust's registration was barred by the law of limitation. Third-party purchasers additionaly sought protection as bona fide buyers. The dispute originated from a historical mutation of records which replaced the trust's name with that of a private individual without prior notice or legal authority.
Findings of Court:
Historical documents and topographical evidence confirmed the land was dedicated to the trust. The court concluded the later mutation of records was based on a misinterpretation of an unrelated administrative letter. The plea of limitation was rejected as the inquiry concerned the foundational truth of trust property, and the purchasers failed to prove they had conducted due diligence.
Issues: The main questions addressed were whether the inquiry into the nature of the property was barred by limitation and whether the status of a bona fide purchaser could be claimed by the appellants despite constructive notice of the trust's claim.
Ratio Decidendi: Inquiries into the nature of public trust properties are not governed by the limitation period applicable to civil suits, as the objective is to protect public interests. Furthermore, the defense of a bona fide purchaser fails if the purchaser acts with willful blindness or neglects to conduct an inquiry into the title of the property, as there is a legal duty to exercise due care and attention to avoid being deemed to have constructive notice of prior claims.
Result: Appeals dismissed.
For the Appellants :Mr Shalin Mehta, SR. Advocate with Advocates, Mr Ninad P Shah & Mr. Hemang Shah, Mr Bharat T. Rao, Advocate
For the Respondents: MS Dhwani Tripathi, AGP, Mr B.G. Patel, Mr C. B. Upadhyaya, Mr SP Majmudar.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural context for appeals under gujarat public trust act, 1950 (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 2. adversarial contentions regarding ownership of religious trust properties and title. (Para 5 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. nature of high court jurisdiction under section 72(4) of the act, 1950. (Para 10) |
| 4. appreciation of evidence and historical dedication of land to a charitable trust. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. applicability of statutes of limitation to quasi-judicial charity commission inquiries. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 6. definition and onus of proof for a bona fide purchaser under the specific relief act. (Para 35 , 36) |
| 7. finality of judicial decisions regarding trust properties and dismissal of meritless appeals. (Para 37 , 38 , 39) |
JUDGMENT :
J.C. DOSHI, J.
1. Heard learned Senior counsel Mr. Shalin Mehta assisted by learned advocate Mr. Ninad Shah for the appellants in First Appeal Nos.1611 of 1991 to 1614 of 1991, learned advocate Mr. BT Rao for the appellant in First Appeal No.1517 of 1991 and learned AGP Ms. Dhwani Tripathi appearing for the respondent State. None remained present for other private respondents.
I. CAPTION AND INTRODUCTION
2. These first appeals arise under Section 72(4) of the GUJARAT PUBLIC TRUST ACT , 1950 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1950"), and are directed against the common judgment and order dated 21st August 1991 passed in Civil Miscellaneous Application Nos. 31 of 1986, 32 of 1986, 33 of 1986, 34 of 1986, and 36 of 1986 by the learned 3rd Joint District Judge, Vadodara.
3. By the said common judgment and order, all five applications filed by the respective appellants – original petitioners have been dismissed confirming the judgment and order dated 26th August 1985 passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Baroda Division, Baroda, in Appeal Nos. 40/79, 42/79, and 46/79, which in turn confirmed the judgment and order dated 25th June 1979 passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Baroda Region, Baroda, in Change Application No. 550 of 1971. By the said order in Change Application No. 550 of 1971, the Assistant Charity Commissioner allowed the application at Exh.1 and ordered that the property bearing Survey No. 9, admeasuring 29 vigas and 3 vasa, and Survey No. 10, admeasuring 3 viga and 69 vasa (in short “the disputed land”), which is forming part of City Survey No. 8/2, Survey No. 1/A admeasuring 707 acre 32 guntha belongs to Shri Yavteshwar Mahadev Trust property as per Exh.60 and 61. The Assistant Charity Commissioner further directed that the disputed land, measurement of which are stated herein above be entered in the Public Trust Register with full details as Shri Yavteshwar Mahadev Trust, bearing Registration Number A-1701-Baroda, as per Exhs.60 and 61.
II. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
4. The Collector, Vadodara, in his capacity as ex officio Administrator and Trustee of Shri Yavteshwar Mahadev Temple Trust situated opposite SSG Hospital, Vadodara, filed a change application under Section 22A r/w Section 79 (1) of the Act of 1950 for a declaration that the disputed land belongs to the Trust properties of Shri Yavteshwar Mahadev Trust. The Trust had been registered under the provisions of the Act of 1950, bearing Trust Registration Number A-1701- Baroda, in the office of the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Baroda Region, Baroda, in the year 1952. The affairs and management of the Trust are managed by the Government through the Collector, Baroda, as ex officio Trustee and Administrator of the said Trust.
4.1 The registration of the Trust commenced with the filing of Application No. 11823 of 1952 and the Trust was registered pursuant to the said application as Shri Yavteshwar Mahadev, Vadodara, by virtue of an order dated 14.5.1956. The object of the Trust is to maintain the temple and manage the worship. The temple, as well as the Trust, is under the direct management of the Government through the Collector
