Happenings in Court can be found out only from judgment of Court.

K.S. Bakthavatsalam, J.

1. These 12 Civil Revision Petitions (except C.R.P. No. 3127 of 1989) are preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the appointment of trustees for the Trust called M.K.N. Madarasa of Adiramapatnam by the learned District Judge, West Thanjavur of Thanjavur in O.S. No. 21 of 1952 as modified as S. No. 6 of 1970, dated 5.9.1989.

2. C.R.P. No.3127 of 1989 is filed for transferring the proceedings on the file of the first respondent herein, relating to the appointment of trustees for the trust M.K.N. Madarasa of Adiramapatnam.

3. The Trust which is the subject matter of these petitions known as M.K.N. Madarasa of Adiramapatnam is a Muslim Trust with large endowments created by one Haji Khader Mohideen Maracair and his three brothers under two deeds of endowment dated 16.12.1900 and 6.4.1901. Undo the said deeds, the four donors constituted themselves as trustees for life and it was intended that their successors in their male line should be hereditary trustees one from each of the three branches in the male line. As one of the brothers, namely, Haji Khader Mohideen Maracair died without male issue, the endowments were managed by the three brothers and after their death by their respective eldest sons. In the year 1943, some interested Muslims of that locality filed a suit in O.S. No. 16 of 1943 on the file of the District Court at West Thanjavur at Thanjavur for framing a scheme for the management of the trust and a scheme was also framed by the Court on 21.2.1945 setting up a Board of nine trustees, three of whom were to be hereditary, one from each of the three branches of the original donors and the remaining six to be non-herediary trustees to be selected by the District Court. Under the said Scheme, the period of office of the trustees for both hereditary and non-hereditary was fixed as three years. When it was found that the said scheme could not work satisfactorily, necessity arose for the interference of the Court and O.S. No. 21 of 1952 came to be filed before the District Court, West Thanjavur at Thanjavur. A fresh scheme was framed by the District Court, Thanjavur in the year 1954. In the said Scheme, the former scheme was modified and one important clause in the modified scheme was that even regarding appointment of hereditary trustees, the District Court should have the power to select proper fittest person from each branch and the interest of the Trust was to be the main consideration in the matter of appointment of hereditary and non-hereditary trustees. It was made clear in the said judgment that the need was compelling, but it would have to be postponed for some time till the arrears due to the trust by some of the hereditary trustees were cleared, Later in the suit O.S. No. 6 of 1970 after framing necessary issues and after considering the evidence, a decree was passed modifying the scheme decree in O.S.N6. 21 of 1952 by providing certain new clauses. The learned District Judge came to the conclusion that necessity trustees should be appointed to hold office for life and non-hereditary trustees should be nominated for a term of five years apart from introducing certain provisions in the scheme. Against the judgment in O.S. No. 6 of 1970, Appeal Suit No. 992 of 1978 and Civil Revision Petition No. 119 of 1979 came to be filed before this Court and by judgment dated 5.8.1987, a Division Bench of this Court, consisting of Sathiadev, J. (as he then was) and Sivasubramaniam, J. fixed a period of three years for the office of both hereditary as well as non-hereditary trustees so that there may be uniformity in the appointment of trustees.

4. In view of this, a notice was issued under Clause 4(a) to (d) of the Decree dated 10.3.1954 in Original Suit No. 21 of 1952 of District Court, West Thanjavur at Thanjavur as modified by the decree dated 30.8.1978 in Original Suit No. 6 of 1970 of District Court, West at Thanjavur and further amended by the decree dated 5th August