SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(All) 146

[2013(1) ADJ 635 (DB)]
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : SUNIL AMBWANI AND ADITYA NATH MITTAL, JJ.
L.D. KAUSHIK AND OTHERS ....Appellants
Versus
DEVENDRA KUMAR MODI AND OTHERS ....Respondents
(First Appeal From Order (D) No. 1756 of 2012, decided on 11th January, 2013)

Advocates:
Counsel :
Yaswant Verma and Navin Sinha for the Petitioner; Rajiv Singh and M.K. Gupta for the Respondents

Headnote:Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Sections 104 (ffa), 92 and Order I, Rule 8—Private trust—Civil suit—Leave to file—Rejection of—Whereas application contested by Board of Trustee—Stating that application not filed by members having any interest in Trust—District Judge refused leave of Court to file suit—On grounds that there is no evidence on record to show that applicants have any interest in trust—Or they have filed suit as representative of general public—Not produced any receipts of staying in Dharmsala maintained by Trust—Nor published any advertisement in newspaper to file suit under Order I Rule 8—On question of mismanagement of trust, permission given to Trust to sell property—Not challenged by any of trustees or beneficiaries—Merely averments in petition that Trust is private trust would not be a ground to establish properties were mismanaged—Applicants not established that they filed suit for benefit of general public in Trust and its properties—Applicants are not beneficiaries of trust—No interference warranted. [Paras 12, 15 and 21]

       

JUDGMENT

By the Court.—This First Appeal From Order under Section 104 (ffa) of the Code of Civil Procedure arises out of an order passed by the District Judge, Mathura dated 3.10.2012 in Misc. Case No. 21 of 2010 (L.D. Kaushik and others v. Devendra Kumar Modi and others) by which the application filed by the applicants-appellants for leave of the Court to file a suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, has been rejected.

2. We have heard Shri Navin Sinha, Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Yashwant Verma for the appellants. Shri M.K. Gupta appears for respondent Nos. 1, 5, 6 and 10. Shri Rajiv Singh has entered appearance on behalf of respondent Nos. 5 and 10.

3. The appellants filed a Suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure with prayers; (a) declare that the present Board of Trustee or Trust Committee comprising of the defendant Nos. 1 to 7 as null and void and remove them from the trusteeship of Rai Bahadur Multanimal Modi Charitable Trust, and to constitute a valid Trust Committee as per the mandate of the Trust deed for administration of the Trust and its properties; (b) direct defendant Nos. 1 to 7 to render accounts of the Trust including rendition of accounts relating to the realisation of the amount from the sale of the properties; (c) order for the inventory of the movable and immovable properties of the Trust; (d) pass a mandatory injunction directing to defendant Nos. 1 to 7 to hand over the trust properties to the Trustees or the Board of Trustees duly appointed by this Court; (e) settle the scheme for administration of the Trust in future; (f) permanently restrain defendant Nos. 1 to 7 from acting as the Board of Trustees or Trust Committee of the Rai Bahadur Multanimal Modi Charitable Trust or sell the properties of the trust or in any way use the funds of the trust for any purpose; and (g) such further and another order as the Court may deem just and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case.

4. The applicants-appellants filed an application alongwith the suit for permission of the Court to file the suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure for declaration that the present Board of Trustees or Trust Committee comprising of opposite party Nos. 1 to 7 as null and void and to remove them from the trusteeship of the trust and to constitute a valid Trust Committee as per the mandate of the trust deed for administration of the trust and its properties and for direction to render accounts of the trusts including the realization of the amount from the sale of the properties and for preparation of inventory of the properties and other consequential reliefs.

5. The application for leave of the Court to file the suit described the applicants as permanent residents of Modi Nagar and well wishers of the Modi family, and the Trust created by late Rai Bahadur Multani Mal Modi. They described their interest in the property in paragraphs 5 to 9 as follows :

“5. That the applicants want to institute the present suit against the opposite parties herein in the interest of the said Trust and in public interest as there has been a breach of Trust by the present Trustees and directions are required from this Hon’ble Court for administration of the said Trust, removal of the present Trustees and appointment of new Board of Trustees in accordance with the Trust Deed.

6. That the applicants are beneficiaries of the Rai Bahadur Multanimal Modi Charitable Trust i.e. the opposite party No. 10 (hereinafter referred to as the said Trust) and are persons having an interest in affairs of the said Trust, as the applicants from time to time have been undertaking pilgrimages to various religious places and have been staying in Dharmashalas constructed and maintained by various Charitable Trusts including the opposite party No. 10. The applicants are Hindus and religious minded persons and have been frequently visiting religious places for pilgrimage. Whenever the applicants used to visit Rishikesh, Vrindab


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top