IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.N. Manjula, J.
Mr.Chiranjeevi Matcha - Applicant
Versus
R.V.Prasad S/o. Mr.G.Rangaraju – Respondent
A.Nos.342, 3095, 3096 & 3097 of 2025 in C.S.No.117 of 1973 A.No.342/2025
Decided On : 06-01-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's administrative procedure for managing trust disputes. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 2. history and significance of the trust's governance changes. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. consequences of prior decisions on current applications. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 4. judicial economy and finality in trust management. (Para 24 , 28) |
ORDER :
R.N. Manjula, J.
A.No.342/2025 is filed to reject the application in A.No.6770/2024 in C.S.No.117 of 1973, as not maintainable.
A.No.3095/2025 is filed to reject the application in A.No.2187/2025 in C.S.No.117 of 1973, as not maintainable.
A.No.3096/2025 is filed to reject the application in A.No.2188/2025 in C.S.No.117 of 1973, as not maintainable.
A.No.3097/2025 is filed to reject the application in A.No.2189/2025 in C.S.No.117 of 1973, as not maintainable.
2. A third party who is the first respondent in A.No.342 of 2025 has filed an application in A.No.6770 of 2024 seeking the relief of amending the Scheme for composition of the Trust of Theagaraya Chetty Educational Institutions (hereinafter referred to as “the Trust) by including the Old Boys (Graduate Constituency) in the Trust. This application in A.No.342 of 2025 has been filed by the Managing Committee of the Trust challenging the maintainability of the very application in A.No.6770/2024.
3. An another third party applicant who is the first respondent in A.No.3096/2025 has filed an application in A.No.2188/2025 by seeking the amendment of the Scheme by inserting provisions for appointment of independent authority to ensure that the names and addresses of all the family members constituency of the Trust and communicate it to all the family members at the conclusion of each terms of such Trustees and for appointment of independent authority to oversee the nomination process for the selection of four family members in accordance with the Scheme and in the event of disagreement, to give power to the independent authority to conduct election among the eligible family members to select the family representatives and to increase the number of non-family Trustees from the existing 2 to at least 5 non-family Trustees (excluding ex-officio members), by appointing independent professionals such as Engineers, Lawyers, Bankers, Financial Experts, Economists, Entrepreneurs, Bureaucrats, Retired Judges and Industrialists as Trustees of the Trust.
4. The Secretary and Correspondent of the Trust has filed an Application in A.No.3096/2025 challenging the maintainability of the same. But the very same applicant has filed another application in A.No.2188/2025 seeking for the relief of appointment of independent Auditor to conduct a forensic audit of the finances and all assets, movable and immovable of the Theagaraya Chetty Educational Institutions, Management and impose a surcharge of any individuals found in misappropriation.
5. The Secretary and Correspondent of the Trust has filed an application in A.No.3095/2025 challenging the maintainability of the application filed in A.No.2187/2025. The very same third party applicant who is the first respondent in A.No.3097/2025 has filed an application in A.No.2189/2025 to direct the Tahsildar to restore the patta in respect of 5.6 grounds in R.S.No.1868/2018 to the name of the Thiyagaraya Chetty Institutions and Managing Committee. The Secretary and Correspondent of the Trust has filed an application in A.No.3097/2025 challenging the maintainability of the very same application.
6. Since all three applications have been filed by the applicant Trust with regard to the maintainability of three applications filed by the third parties seeking the relief of amending the Scheme and other reliefs, all these applications have been taken up together for hearing.
7. Heard Mr.B.Ravi, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.D.Nagasila, the learned counsel for R1.
8. Before adverting into the merits of these applications, a short background of the present Scheme under which the functions of the Trust is being carried out, needs to be given.
9.
Restatement of settled issues disallows reintroduction of previously excluded constituencies in Trust governance, maintaining judicial economy.
Section 92 of Code which reads public charities.
Modifications to a trust's scheme must be made under Section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code, and historical context and limitations on modifying the scheme should be considered.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of the settlement of the scheme for the better administration of the trust under Section 50a(1) of the Trusts act, 1950, and the affi....
The main legal point established is that amendments to pleadings can be allowed if necessary for deciding the rights of the parties, bonafide, and relevant, without causing prejudice that cannot be c....
The suit under Section 92 of the CPC was not maintainable as the validity of the MoU had already been upheld and a separate suit challenging it was barred.
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.
The court affirmed that interested persons in public trust matters have the right to join proceedings, and the concept of abatement does not apply, ensuring that inquiries can continue effectively.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.