Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
M/s. G.V.Govindaswami Naidu Charities – Appellant
Versus
M/s.Rajalakshmi Gengusamy Charities – Respondent
C.R.P.No.424 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.10050 of 2023
Decided on : 02-04-2024
CIVIL REVISION PETITION - TRUST MANAGEMENT - CPC 1908, SEC 92 - The court discussed Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which governs suits relating to public charitable trusts. It emphasized that a suit under this section is maintainable only against a trust and not by a trust itself. The court interpreted that the plaintiffs' claims were personal in nature and did not serve the public interest, thus falling outside the purview of Section 92. The court's decision was influenced by precedents that clarified the scope of Section 92, leading to the conclusion that the plaintiffs could pursue their claims through a regular civil suit instead.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiffs, representing the G. V. Govindaswami Naidu Charities, sought leave to file a suit under Section 92 of the CPC to address alleged mismanagement and to modify the trust deed. They aimed to remove certain trustees, appoint new ones, and challenge various transactions involving trust properties. The trial court rejected their application, stating that the suit was not maintainable under Section 92 as it primarily concerned private disputes rather than public interest.
Finding of the Court:
The court upheld the trial court's decision, agreeing that the plaintiffs' claims were personal and did not meet the criteria for a Section 92 suit. It noted that the plaintiffs had previously held positions of authority within the trust and could not now claim ignorance of the transactions they sought to challenge. The court found no evidence of mala fide actions by the defendants.
Issues: Whether the plaintiffs could maintain a suit under Section 92 of the CPC against the trustees of the G. V. Govindaswami Naidu Charities, and whether the claims made were in the interest of the public or merely personal disputes.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that Section 92 of the CPC is applicable only to suits against public charitable trusts and not by them. It emphasized that suits claiming personal rights or interests do not fall under this section, and the plaintiffs' claims were deemed to be personal rather than serving the public interest.
Final Decision: The Civil Revision Petition was dismissed, affirming the trial court's order that the plaintiffs could pursue their claims through a regular civil suit rather than under Section 92 of the CPC.
ORDER :
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the Fair and Decretal Order dated 17.09.2021 made in I.A.No.115/2021 in O.S.CFR No.932/2021 on the file of Principal Sessions Court, Tirupur.
This Revision is filed by the plaintiffs in O.S C.F.R. No. 932 of 2021 challenging the fair and decretal order dated 17.09.2021 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur, in IA No 115/2021 in the said suit. The said IA was filed seeking the leave of the court to institute a suit under Sec 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure(CPC), 1908.
2. The proposed suit O.S.CFR No.932 of 2021, for which leave of the Court was sought, intended to seek the following reliefs.
b) To remove Defendant 3 & 4 as Trustees of G.V. Govindaswami Naidu Charity and to appoint new trustees in their place.
c) Appoint any other new trustees who are competent and who have experience in administration of educational institutions.
d) Directing enquiry into the mismanagement of the Trust allegedly by the Plaintiff and pass consequential orders vesting the property owned by the Trust and its restoration from Defendants 1 to 5 or any other person having control of the properties of G.V. Govindaswami Naidu Charities.
e) Declaring the first plaintiff's title to the suit property and to order and direct the defendants to deliver possession thereof to the first plaintiff and to declare that all the instruments consisting of lease deeds dated 09.12.1999 and registered as Doc. No. 3045 and 3046 of 1999 and the sale deed dated 21.06.1993 registered as Doc. No. 1668 of 1993 and the Transfer Deeds dated 20.12.2005 registered as Doc. No. 3523 and 3524 of 2006 and cancellation of Settlement Deed dated 11.04.2008 registered as Doc. No. 2661 of 2008 and Rectification Ded dated 13.09.2017 registered as Document No. 6923 of 2017 are al as sham, nominal, void and illegal documents executed by the second defendant by which no right or title has been transferred to the first defendant Trust and further holding that these instruments are not for the benefit or in the interest of the first plaintiff Trust and its beneficiaries.
f) Appoint a Receiver to take charge of GVG Auditorium and maintain and preserve the same till the termination of the legal proceedings and entrust the same to the lawful owners thereof.
g) Granting permanent injunction to restrain the defendants, their men, servants and agents from encumbering or alienating the suit property and any part thereof.
h) Declare that the Lok Adalath award in OS No.125 of 2018 dated 19.09.2018 on the file of Sub Court Udumalpet, is vitiated by fraud and collusion and consequently void, illegal and does not affect the title of the Sri GVG Visalakshmi College for women established by G.V. Govindaswami Naidu Charities to the said property, and to set aside the same.
3. The learned District Judge after hearing both sides in I.A.No.115/2021 had passed a detailed order dated 17.09.2021 rejecting the leave sought for under Sec 92 of CPC, which is now challenged before this Court in this Civil Revision Petition.
4. The order dated 17.09.2021 passed in I.A.No.115 of 2021 concluded that a Trust as Plaintiff filing a suit, is not maintainable; no cause of action arose for framing a scheme, removal of trustees and induction of new trustees; Mrs.Sumathi Krishna Prasad was herself Managing Trustee since 2011 and she, questioning the transactions in 2020, is to espouse personal cause and it is a dispute between two Trusts and its trustees and not for the well-being of the Trust; there is nothing wrong in seeing the averments in plaint without going deep into the contentious issues; the suit
A suit under Section 92 of the CPC can only be filed against a trust and not by a trust itself; claims that are personal in nature do not qualify for relief under this section.
The court established that for a suit under Section 92 of the CPC, it is essential to demonstrate a public charitable trust, a breach of trust, and appropriate relief sought, emphasizing the protecti....
Point of Law : Where the allegation of breach of trust, direction for administration of Trust is absent, the suit is maintainable and obtaining leave under Section 92 of the CPC is not necessary.
A suit under Section 92 of CPC must serve public interest and establish breach of trust; claims of personal grievances cannot sustain such suits.
A Trust can seek relief under Section 92 CPC when it is a party to the proceedings alongside interested individuals, especially in cases of alleged mismanagement.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to file an application under Section 92 C.P.C. for managing public trusts involving public charity, and the necessity to implead th....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
