Person in management liable to account for the period remained in management.

This appeal arises out of a suit filed under section 92, Civil Procedure Code and relates to the period for which the trustees, who have been removed by the decree of the lower Court, have to account. The Collector of Tiruchirapalli, who was the plaintiff in the suit, is the appellant.

The respondents, who number about 31, are the descendants of one V.M.Muthukaruppan Chettiar. Muthukaruppan Chettiar founded several charities, one of which was an Annadanam charity at Tirumayam in Tiruchirapalli District. The appellant claimed that the properties set out in Schedules A to D to the plaint belonged to the Anandanam trust established by V. M. Muthukaruppan Chettiar, that the respondents asserted a hostile title to the trust and that they were guilty of breaches of trust, and prayed for their removal and for accounts.

Schedule A to the plaint is the chatram in which Annadanam is to be performed. B Schedule covered lands in Olakkudipatti village. C Schedule item 1 is 31 9/12 shares out of 37 shares in the village of Mangalanadu, which is of an extent of about 360 velis. The second item of C Schedule is certain lands in Arasarkulam village. D Schedule covered the movables belonging to the choultry.

There were six branches in the family of Muthukaruppan Chettiar and the seniormost member of the various branches managed the trust by turns. Respondents 1, 7, 15, the father of respondent 17, respondents 19 and 22 were the managing members of the various branches, who were at some time or other in management of one or more of the properties mentioned above.

The respondents contested the suit. Respondents 3, 15, 18, 19 and 25 filed a common written statement while the 15th respondent filed a separate written statement. The substance of the contentions so far as it is relevant for the present purpose is that the former set of respondents pleaded that items 1 and 4 of B Schedule and item 1 of C Schedule belonged to the family and the income therefrom was exclusively allotted to certain religious and charitable purposes at the discretion of the members. They, however, admitted that A Schedule, items 2, 3 and 5 of B Schedule, item 2 of C Schedule and D Schedule belonged to the Annadanam trust.

The 14th respondent contested the claim but admitted that all the properties excepting C Schedule, item 1 belonged to the trust, and while the property was owned by the members of the family as their own the income was expended for the maintenance of the charities and the religious trust. All the respondents denied the alleged malversation of the funds of the institution.

The learned Subordinate Judge, after giving the necessary findings, held that A, B, C, and D Schedule properties belonged to the V.M. Annadanam Chatram Charity at Tirumayam, and having regard to the hostile title set up by the respondents to the properties of the institution removed them from the office of the trusteeship and directed the properties to vest in the trustees to be appointed under the scheme to be framed by the Court. He also directed that the 22nd respondent should render accounts of his management from 12th January, 1946 to 6th May, 1947, and that the 17th respondent should produce the account books of his father in respect of his management of item 2 of the S Schedule properties for the same period. The learned Subordinate Judge held that the 22nd respondent should be accountable in respect of A Schedule properties, items 1 to 7 of the B Schedule properties, item 1 of the C Schedule property and items 1 to 154 of the D Schedule properties. As regards the 17th respondent he was directed to produce the accounts of his father’s management of the 2nd item in S Schedule property. As regards the accounting, the learned Subordinate Judge held that there has been no misappropriation of the funds of the charity by the members of the family, and that in the circumstances of the case Article 120 of the Limitation Act would apply to the claim, and as a receiver was i