Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Sapru and Agarwala, JJ.
S.DARSHAN LAL - Appellant
Versus
R.E.S.DALLIWALL - Respondents
Civil Revn. 413 Of 1949
Decided On : 04/02/1952
TRUST - Termination - Discharge of Trustee - Jurisdiction of District Judge - Trustees Act, 1866, Sections 71, 72 - English Law - Applicability in India.
Fact of the Case:
A trust was created by a deed in 1921, and the trustee was appointed by the District Judge in 1926. The trust was to provide for the maintenance of the settlor's wife and the education of his children, and to give the property to the two sons upon the termination of the trust. The trust was to terminate upon the death of the settlor's wife or when the younger son attained the age of 28 years, whichever was later. The settlor's wife died in 1944, and the younger son attained the age of 28 years long ago. The trustee applied to the District Judge for an order of discharge, and the beneficiaries applied for an order vesting the property in them. The District Judge held that the trust had come to an end and that the trustee was discharged from his office, but that he had no power to order the return of the property to the beneficiaries or to pass an order of discharge in favor of the trustee.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the trust had come to an end upon the death of the settlor's wife, and that the trustee was automatically discharged from his office. However, the court held that the District Judge had no jurisdiction to discharge the trustee in the sense of a release from his liability to render accounts, and that the settlement of accounts could not be done by the District Judge in a summary proceeding. The court also held that the English law was not applicable in India of its own force, and that there was no presumption that English law applied to Indians in India.
Issues: 1. Whether the trust had come to an end. 2. Whether the District Judge had jurisdiction to discharge the trustee in the sense of a release from his liability to render accounts. 3. Whether the English law was applicable in India of its own force.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the trust had come to an end upon the death of the settlor's wife, as provided in the trust deed. 2. The court held that the District Judge had no jurisdiction to discharge the trustee in the sense of a release from his liability to render accounts, as the settlement of accounts could not be done by the District Judge in a summary proceeding. 3. The court held that the English law was not applicable in India of its own force, and that there was no presumption that English law applied to Indians in India.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the application in revision and also the application of the respondents under Section 18, Trustees Act. In the circumstances of the case, the court ordered the parties to bear their own costs in this Court.
( 1 ) THIS is an application in revision against an order of the District Judge of Saharanpur refusing to discharge the applicant from his office of trusteeship.
( 2 ) ONE Mr. H. B. S. Dalliwal, a barrister, residing at Mussoorie and owning considerable property at that place executed two deeds of trust, one on 21-4-1921 and the other on 25-6-1921. On 8-5-1926 he executed a will in respect of some other properties. Mr. Dalliwal died on 12-5-1926. The trustees of the trust deeds and the executors of the will appointed by him did not agree to act and, therefore, the District Judge appointed the applicant, Sri S. Darshan Lal, Barrister-at-law of dehra Dun, as the sole trustee of the properties by his order dated 19-8-1926. One of the beneficiaries under the trust deeds and the will was Mrs. E. B. Dalliwal, while the two sons of mr. Dalliwal, Roy and Kenneth, were the other two beneficiaries. Mrs. Dalliwal died on 22-10-1944. On 29-1-1947 the opposite parties, the two sons of Mr. Dalliwal, made an application to the district Judge alleging that the trust had come to an end and prayed that the properties held by the trustee might be made over to them and the trustee might be asked to explain accounts. Sri darshan Lal was agreeable to explain the accounts but was unwilling to part with the property as he claimed that he had spent some money out of his own pocket which he was entitled to get back before he could be ordered to hand over the property. On an agreement between the parties the District Judge appointed a commissioner to go into the accounts. The report submitted by the commissioner was not acceptable to either of the parties.
( 3 ) THE opposite parties case before the Court below was that as under the terms of the trust deed of 25-6-1921 the trust had come to an end, the trustee was bound to hand over the properties covered by that deed to them. Sri Darshan Lals case was that the trust had not yet come to an end. But during the pendency of the proceedings he made an application on 31-5-1948 stating that :
"the accounts of the entire property upto date have been rendered. The amount of debts borrowed by the applicant under the orders of this Court from time to time as trustee and manager are to be paid by this property of the trust and the beneficiaries and the same are taken therefor. It is, therefore, prayed that an order of discharge under the circumstances be passed in favour of the applicant. "
It is obvious that what Sri Darshan Lal meant by this application was not a formal order declaring that he has ceased to be a trustee but a release from the liabilities incurred by him in his capacity as a trustee.
( 4 ) THE learned District Judge upon an interpretation of the trust deed of 25-6-1921 held that the trust had come to an end and that, therefore, the trustee stood discharged from his office but that he had no power, in those circumstances, either to order the return of the property to the opposite parties or to pass an order of discharge in favour of Sri Darshan Lal. The opposite parties submitted to the order passed against them but Sri Darshan Lal came up in revision to this Court against that order. During the pendency of the revision application, the opposite parties made an application under Section 18, Trustees Act, No. XXVII of 1866, praying that an order vesting the property in the opposite parties be passed by this Court. These two applications are now before us for disposal.
( 5 ) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties and have come to the conclusion that both the applications must be dismissed.
( 6 ) THE first point to be decided is whether the trust has come to an end. The second trust-deed of 25-6-1921 provided that out of the income of the trust property Es. 200 monthly would be paid to the executants wife Mrs. B. B. Dalliwal, and 2/3 of the remaining income to the executants son Eoy E. S. Dalliwal so long as he remained in a college and 1/3rd to the executants second son Kennith H
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
