The court affirmed that resolutions affecting individual trustee rights are not governed by Section 92 of the CPC, allowing the plaintiff's suit for reinstatement as valid despite the First Appellate Court's ruling.

JUDGMENT :

R. SAKTHIVEL, J.

This Second Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated December 16, 2016 passed in A.S.No.1 of 2016 by the 'Second Additional Sub Court, Coimbatore' [henceforth 'First Appellate Court' for brevity], whereby the Judgment and Decree dated September 30, 2015 passed in O.S.No.624 of 2002 by the ‘III Additional District Munsif, Coimbatore' [henceforth 'Trial Court' for brevity] was reversed.

2. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the Original Suit.

Plaintiff's Case

3. The B.M.Nanjian Trust was founded on September 10, 1981 and the Trust Deed was registered on September 17, 1981.

st According to the Trust Deed, the 1 defendant is the Founder as well as the Managing Trustee of the Trust while the plaintiff and defendants 2 to 4 are its Life Trustees.

3.1. The land in the Suit Property was purchased on behalf of B.M.Nanjian Trust and a Kalyana Mandapam was constructed thereon infurtherance of the objects of the Charitable Trust. The 1 defendant contributed a sum of Rs.5,001/- as corpus of the Trust. Apart from the funds raised from the public, the plaintiff and the defendants 1 to 4 jointly and individually made contributions for the construction of Suit Kalyana Mandapam. The construction was completed and it began functioning from August 21, 1989.

3.2. Then the 5th defendant was inducted as a Trustee of the Trust by the unanimous resolution of the Trust Committee on August 18th, 1996, post which, the Trust became untrust. The 1st defendant against the objects of Charitable Trust utilized one portion of the Suit Property as his own business premises.

3.3. Since the plaintiff raised objection to such acts, the defendants passed a Resolution illegally against the By-laws and the Memorandum of the Trust, removing the plaintiff from the Life Trusteeship and forbidding the plaintiff from entering the Suit Property and attending the day-to-day affairs of the Trust. Nobody is empowered by the Deed of Trust or the Memorandum of Association dated September 10, 1981 to remove any of the Life Trustees. Further, the plaintiff was attacked by the defendants and he was obstructed from entering into the Suit Property. The defendants refused to allow the plaintiff from attending the day-to-day affairs of the Trust. Hence, the plaintiff filed the Suit for the relief of permanent injunction and declaration.

Defendants' Case

4. The defendants filed written statement stating that the first defendant founded the B.M.Nanjian Trust on September 10, 1981. He was the Managing Trustee and appointed his sons as Trustees. B.M.N.KalyanaMandapam was constructed by the 1st defendant in his own property with his own income, to fund the various noble objects of the Trust covered in the Trust Deed. The Trust with a view to fulfil its objectives, also received donations from close relatives.

4.1. During the year 2000-2001, the plaintiff had incurred huge loss in his various personal businesses and begged for funds from the B.M.Nanjian Trust to recover from the same. But the Managing Trustee/first defendant refused to give any amount from the Trust fund since it was meant only for charitable purposes. The plaintiff in vengeance sent various false and frivolous letters to various concerned Government Departments. Due to the defendant's nefarious activities, the Board of Trustees passed a Resolution on July 5, 2001 to remove the plaintiff from the Board of Trustees.

4.2. The 1st defendant is entitled to use his own prop