A trustee has the right to apply to the court for an opinion, advice, or direction on matters affecting the management or administration of a charitable or religious trust under Section 7 of the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920, and the court has a duty to give such opinion, advice, or direction unless it considers the question to be not proper for summary disposal.

1. Petitioner in O.P.No.7 of 1996 on the file of Principal District Judge, Dindugul is the revision petitioner herein.

2. An application was filed under Section 7 of the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920 by petitioner for opinion, or advise or direction of the Court for sale of immovable properties belonging to the Trust. By the impugned order lower court dismissed the same on the ground that there are vacancies in the Board of Trustees and unless the same is filled up, it will not consider the request for giving opinion. The application was dismissed.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the impugned order of lower court is based on misunderstanding of law. Merely because there is vacancy in the Board of Trustees that will not debar a trustee from getting opinion. Counsel further submitted that he being a hereditary trustee, he is entitled to move under section 7 of the Charitable and Religious Trust Act, 1920 and the Court cannot dismiss the same for reasons stated therein.

4. After hearing counsel for petitioner, I find force in the above contentions.

5. Section 7 of the Charitable and Religious Trust Act, 1920 reads thus,

“ Section 7: Powers of Trustee to apply for direction : (1) Save as hereinafter provided in this Act, any trustee of an express or constructive trust created or existing for public purpose of a charitable or religious nature may apply by petition to the court, within the local limits of whose jurisdiction any substantial part of the subject-matter of the trust is situate, for the opinion, advice or direction of the court on any question affecting the management or administration of the trust proport, and the Court shall give its opinion, advice or direction, as the case may be thereon:

Provided that the court shall not be bound to give such opinion, advice or direction on any question which it considers to be a question not proper for summary disposal.

.(2) The court on a petition under sub-section (1), may either give its opinion, advice or direction thereon forthwith, or fix a date for the hearing of the petition, and may direct a copy thereof, together with notice of the date so fixed, to be served on such of the persons interested in the trust, or to be published for information in such manner, as it thinks fit.

.(3) On any date fixed under sub-section (2) or on any subsequent date to which the hearing may be adjourned, the court, before giving any opinion, advice or direction, shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to all persons appearing in connection with the petition.

.(4) A trustee slating in good faith the facts of any matter relating to the trust in a petition under sub-section (1), and acting upon the opinion, advice or direction of the court given thereon, shall be deemed, as far as his own responsibility is concerned, to have discharged his duty as such trustee in the matter in respect of which the petition was made.”

6. In Avoch Thevar v. Chummar, 1957 Ker. 171, their Lordships considered the jurisdiction of Court when a Trustee moved court for getting an opinion. In paragraphs 6 to 9 of the decision their Lordships considered this question and held thus,

“(6) The next question is as to the scope of the jurisdiction of the court under the section and whether the court below has acted in excess. The Section it is clear, grants liberty to a trustee to get the direction, advice, etc., of the court regarding the management or administration of the court regarding that management or administration of the trust property. The Court under the section exercises what might be called its consultative jurisdiction, giving guidance to the trustee. The court is not, h owever, to grant sanction merely because it is applied for. The limitation is that the court will refuse to consider the matter if in its opinion the question is one not capable of summary disposal e.g., if it is one of detail or difficulty. In any event the court will consider judi