The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of adhering to the trust's charitable objectives and the need for ample evidence to justify significant changes to the trust property.

1. The above Civil Revision Petition arises against the order passed in Trust O.P.No.58 of 2013, filed under Section 7 of the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920, on the file of the District Court II, Kanchipuram.

2. The petitioners filed the Original Petition under Section 7 of the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920 praying the Court to give its opinion, advice or direction to the petitioners, who are the Managing Trustee and Trustees of Veerasamy Mudaliar Charities, to pursue the resolution dated 04.04.2012 to demolish the existing rear portion of the Marriage Hall and construct a commercial complex in terms of the sanctioned plan obtained by the Trust and for this purpose, to procure bank loan of Rs.2 crores from South Indian Bank, Kanchipuram or any other bank which offers better interest rate for their repayment on the strength of the immovable property for carrying out the proposed construction of the commercial complex and thereafter, rent the same and utilise the income to carry out the objects of the Trust, after defraying all the expenses connected with maintaining the Trust Property.

3. The District Court II, Kanchipuram dismissed the Original Petition, against which the petitioners have filed the above Civil Revision Petition.

4. Heard Mr. V. Lakshminarayanan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.

5. The brief case of the petitioners are as follows:

(i) The 1st petitioner is the Managing Trustee and the petitioners 2 to 4 are the Trustees of S.Veerasamy Mudaliar Charities. The Trust was formed by its Erstwhile Turstee Late S.Veerasamy Mudaliar and others under a registered Deed of Trust dated 04.03.1972. According to the petitioners, the Trust was created solely for the purpose of carrying charitable and philanthropic activities for the welfare of the poor and the downtrodden. The object of the Trust was to make all efforts for uplifting the downtrodden people, irrespective of their caste, creed or religion on a non-profit basis and to promote the welfare of the poor students of economically weaker sections among other charitable purposes described in the Trust Deed.

(ii) According to the petitioners, the Trust owns the property mentioned in the petition, measuring an extent of 27 cents along with the Marriage Hall constructed thereon. The petition property originally belonged to Late S.Veerasamy Mudaliar and was subsequently vested in the Trust by the said S.Veerasamy Mudaliar under the Trust Deed dated 04.03.1972. The petition property is the only immovable property owned by the Trust and it is the only source of income to the Trust for carrying out its charitable activities. As per the Trust Deed, the Trust property and the income derived out of the said property shall be used in the manner which is most beneficial to the interest of the Trust and for the realisation of the charitable objects of the Trust. In pursuance of its objects, the Trust has been renting the Marriage Hall at highly subsidised rates as compared to the rentals quoted by other Marriage Halls in and around that area. The income earned out of the Marriage Hall, after defraying the expenditure towards maintenance, salaries and other heads, are utilized to carry out philanthropic and charitable activities, including funding of tuition fees, expenses for education of poor students and has been functioning in a noteworthy manner for more than 40 years.

(iii) According to the petitioners, the Trust is law abiding and has been filing its Income Tax returns regularly. The Marriage Hall is being rented for wedding at the subsidised rate of Rs.12,000/- per wedding. The income derived from the Marriage Hall covers the cost of maintenance and leaves the Trust with paltry sums to carry out the remaining objects of the Trust. According to the petitioners, it has become increasingly difficult for the Trust to carry out its charitable functions with the meager income generated from the Marriage Hall. Further, the petitioners have stated