Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
R. Asokkan – Appellant
Versus
Sub Registrar, Chinnalapatti, Dindigul, District – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the refusal of amendment registration (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. arguments on authority and legality of rejection (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. trusteeship and resignation acceptance requires board resolution (Para 15 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 36) |
| 4. order to quash impugned proceedings and direct registration (Para 38 , 39) |
ORDER :
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
This writ petition challenges the refusal check slip issued by the first respondent on 13.12.2024.
2. There exists a Trust by the name of “Cheran Educational Trust” at Chettiapatti, Dindigul District. The Trust was originally formed by way of a registered trust deed on 15.07.1999. At the time of registration, the Trust had the following trustees:-
“i) A.Saravanan
ii) R.P.Ravindran and
iii) P.Chandraseharan”
3. Subsequently, A.Saravanan resigned from the Trust. Consequent thereto, a supplementary trust deed was executed on 31.10.2002. By this document, the resignation of Saravanan was accepted and the following persons joined the Trust as trustees:
“i) R.Asokan
ii) R.P.Ravindran
iii) M.Sivakumar and
iv) P.Chandrasekaran”
4. The trust deed was further amended by another deed of amendment dated 28.03.2009. By t
Trustees' unilateral resignations require acceptance by the Board, and the Registrar must register amendments without questioning internal validity.
Point of law: in the guise of registering the supplementary trust deed, the petitioner cannot enter into any transaction, which would dilute the right of the 3rd respondent in the pending civil Court....
The court established that registration of a society with a name identical to an existing society is prohibited under Section 7 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960.
The court clarified the authority of the Assistant Commissioner under Section 23 of the Act of 1959 and interpreted the eligibility criteria for trusteeship as per the amended constitution of the Tru....
While the proviso to Section 32A deals with document relating to the transfer of ownership of immovable property, the principal Section 32A deals with any document other than document relating to the....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the maintainability of appeals under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, and the validity of the findings of the Appellate Authority. The judgmen....
Trustees cannot unilaterally remove a permanent trustee without proper authority and adherence to legal procedures outlined in the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act.
The registrar's refusal to grant permission for trust property sale must be supported by evidence of prejudice to public interest; arbitrary denials are against statutory provisions.
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
