PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
M.L.Singhal, J.
Kanhaiya Lal Khatak
Versus
Manohar Lal
Civil Revisions No. 995 of 2000,
Decided On : JULY 26, 2001
Trust Property - Naming of Charitable Eye Hospital - S. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, S. 51 and S. 52 of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882 - The court discussed the provisions of S. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, S. 51 and S. 52 of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882. The judgment highlighted the prohibition on trustees from using Trust property for personal profit or unconnected purposes, and the restriction on trustees from buying Trust property for personal gain. The court emphasized the importance of trustees strictly adhering to the purpose of the Trust and not deriving personal advantage from the administration of Trust property. The naming of the charitable eye hospital after a trustee was deemed to interfere with the intention of the Trust's creator, leading to the restoration of the temporary injunction to the plaintiff.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants, alleging illegal removal from a trust created for establishing a Gurudwara. The defendants planned to open a charitable eye hospital in the Gurudwara premises and name it after a trustee or his relative, leading to the plaintiff's objection and application for temporary injunction.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the naming of the charitable eye hospital after a trustee interfered with the intention of the Trust's creator and restored the temporary injunction to the plaintiff.
Issues: The issues revolved around the misuse of Trust property by the defendants, particularly in naming the charitable eye hospital after a trustee, and the preservation of the Gurudwara as a religious property for the community at large.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of S. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, S. 51 and S. 52 of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882, emphasizing the prohibition on trustees from using Trust property for personal profit or unconnected purposes, and the restriction on trustees from buying Trust property for personal gain.
Final Decision: The court allowed the revision and restored the temporary injunction granted to the plaintiff, concluding that naming the charitable eye hospital after a trustee interfered with the intention of the Trust's creator.
1. This is a revision filed by Kanhaiya Lal Khatak, plaintiff, against the order dated 8-12-1999 passed by Additional District Judge, Faridabad, whereby he had allowed the appeal of defendants-Manohar Lal and others against the order dated 15-6-1999 of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Faridabad, allowing the application of the plaintiff Kanhaiya Lal Khatak, under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with S. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for restraining the defendants from naming the charitable eye hospital at Faridabad after the name of the trustee or his nominee.
2. Plaintiff Kanhaiya Lal Khatak filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction against the defendants-Manohar Lal and others. It was alleged in the plaint that there was a trust created by Late Sant Bhagat Singh Ji Maharaj of District Bannu, now in west Pakistan and the plaintiff was one of the trustees of the said trust. On 2/04/1992 the defendants had passed illegally and wrongfully a resolution whereby the plaintiff was illegally and arbitrarily removed from the Trust. Late Sant Bhagat Singh Ji Maharaj of District Bannu had bequeathed, by way of registered Will, which was registered in the office of Sub-Registrar, Bannu on 3-5-1945, the entire of his properties to the Trust for establishing a Gurudwara and had specifically laid down that the trustees should be the persons who have faith in holy Sri Guru Granth Sahib and follow its scriptures. The followers of Late Sant Bhagat Singh Ji Maharaj of District Bannu, who had migrated to Faridabad, consequent upon the partition of the country, were to carry out the work of the Trust in accordance with the wishes of Late Sant Bhagat Singh Ji Maharaj. Trust had left movable and immovable property in Pakistan and after the partition of the country the trustees started the activities of setting up of a Gurudwara in New Industrial Township in Faridabad. Land was allotted to the Trust by the Ministry of Rehabilitation, Government of India through Shri Sudhir Ghosh, Administrator of the Faridabad Development Board, for the purpose of erecting a Gurudwara and Musafir Khana. Thereafter, through contributions and donations by the public at large who were owing allegiance to the Sikh faith and Late Sant Bhagat Singh Ji Maharaj, a Gurudwara along with Musafir Khana was constructed. The property situated at the site known as Trust Dera Sant Bhagat Singh Ji Maharaj, Bannuwale, N.H.-1, N.I.T., Faridabad, is physically a Gurudwara and all the assets of the Gurudwara vest in the Trust. None of the trustees can treat the Trust property as his personal property or the property of any of his families. Trustees kept on functioning normally and of late the income of the Gurudwara rose to Rs.70,000.00. Manohar Lal etc. became afflicted with greed and they set their eyes on the properties of the Trust. No trustee in his personal or individual capacity can use or misuse the Trust property in his name or in the name of any of the members of his family. Plaintiff had objected to the trustees projecting the members of their families in the Gurudwara as religious figures, whereas, according to Sikh Tenets no living person can be equated with any of the ten Gurus and the holy Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Plaintiff started objecting to the defendants trying to convert the Gurudwara into one of a Dera for their personal purposes. He was disassociated as a trustee by passing an illegal and arbitrary resolution dated 2-4-1992. The suit of the plaintiff was challenged by the defendants. Ad interim injunction was granted in favour of the plaintiff which continued.
3. During the pendency of the suit, an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with S. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed praying that defendants be restrained from opening a hospital and naming it"Bhagat Mehar Chand Charitable Eye-Hospital" or naming it after the name of some trustee or his relative, in the Gurudwara premises. It was sta
Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Federation Ltd. V/s. Sunder Bros., Delhi
AI
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.