HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
Ashok Raghav - Petitioner
Versus
Shri Krishna Janam Sewa Sansthan - Respondent
Matters Under Article 227 No. - 11338 of 2025, Matters Under Article 227 No. – 1903, 2081 of 2015
Decided On : 17-11-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction under article 227. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. details of land ownership and trust creation. (Para 6 , 7 , 9 , 12) |
| 3. eviction proceedings and trial court decisions. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. authority and representation issues in litigation. (Para 18 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. nature of trust and exemptions under the act. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. public charitable and religious status of institutions. (Para 26 , 27 , 30) |
| 7. legal framework and exemptions under u.p. act. (Para 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 8. authority of society's secretary in litigation. (Para 40 , 42) |
| 9. final decision and directive for lower courts. (Para 46 , 48 , 49) |
JUDGMENT :
ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. These three connected writ petitions have been filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India assailing the order passed by court below in eviction proceeding initiated by plaintiff-respondent.
2. Matters under Article 227 No. 11338 of 2025 has been filed questioning the legality of judgment and order dated 31.08.2012 passed by Judge Small Cause Court/Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mathura in S.C.C. Suit No. 26 of 2001 and order dated 30.08.2025 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Mathura in S.C.C. Revision No. 37 of 2012.
3. Matters under Article 227 No. 1903 of 2015 has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 12.03.2015 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 8, Mathura remitting the matter back to lower revisional court to decide revision afresh in light of observation made in the order impugned.
4. Matters under Article 227 No. 2081 of 2015 also questions the legality of order dated 12.03.2015 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 8, Mathura remitting back the matter to trial court to decide afresh.
5. Counsels appearing in all the three matters representing different parties consented that matter be heard and decided together, thus, this Court proceeds to hear and decide the same by common order.
6. Brief facts, leading rise to present dispute, are that one Sri Jugal Kishore Birla son of Raja Baldeo Das Birla, from his own funds, purchased 13 acre 37 decimal land bearing Khasra No. 825, Muhal Gair Khwahindgan Khewat No. 255, which was in ruins, from its owner Swami Rai Krishna Das and Rai Anand Krishna for Rs.13,400/-, in the name of Mahamana Pandit Madan Mohan Malviya, Gosain Ganesh Dutt and Professor Bhikhan Lal Aatreya on 08.02.1944 and a registered sale-deed was executed.
7. Mahamana Malviya in order to develop the land constituted a temporary committee in name of “Shri Krishna Janmbhumi Jirnodhar Samiti”. A publication was made in daily newspaper on 08.07.1944. A meeting was held at Mathura for constructing a monument of Shri Krishna and it was resolved that money needed for such construction was to be collected. However, due to sad demise of Pandit Madan Mohan Malviya, the work of Samiti stopped. Sri Jugal Kishore Birla who had purchased the land from his money, in order to fulfill the dream of Mahamana Malviya established a trust on 21.02.1951. The trust was created in name of “Shri Krishna Janmbhumi Trust”. Clause 2 of the deed provided for object of the trust, which is as under:-

8. Clause 4 of the deed provided that trust committee would have minimum of 11 trustees with a maximum limit of 21. Names of original15 trustees was detailed in Clause 4 of the deed, which is as under:-


9. With passage of time, on 01.05.1958, a society in the name of “Shri Krishna Janmsthan Seva Sansthan” was registered under provisions of Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter referred as “the Act of 1860”) and registration certificate was granted on 23.09.1958. Clause 2 of Memorandum of society enumerates the object of the society which was formed by trustees of Shri Krishna Janmbhumi Trust, which is as under:-

10. Initially, all the 15 trustees were made Member of the society whose name finds place in Clause 3 of the Memorandum, which is as under:-

11. The by-laws of society were amended and registered on 27.06.1983. From time to ti




The court affirmed that the society is a public charitable institution exempt from the U.P. Urban Buildings Act, and upheld the Secretary's authority to litigate on behalf of the society.
The court upheld the trial court's finding that the landlord was a charitable trust exempt from eviction laws, affirming that previous judgments establishing legal character are relevant.
The court affirmed that findings of legal character regarding institutions must adhere to established court rulings and cannot be ignored in summary proceedings.
A public trust registered as a society under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act can still be managed under Section 92 of the CPC, allowing civil court intervention for breach of trust allegati....
Section 2(13) of the Trusts Act when the petitioner Society is registered under the Societies Registration Act and the same is registered for charitable purposes, it is deemed to be a charitable Trus....
The suit under Section 92 of the CPC is maintainable as the Sabha is deemed a public Trust, enabling remedial actions against mismanagement despite being registered as a Society.
A public trust registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1850 is competent to enter into a contract and can become a member of a co-operative society, subject to the provisions of the Gujarat Co-....
The court ruled that the trust in question was a private trust, rejecting claims of it being a public charitable trust, and upheld the applicability of the U.P. Urban Buildings Act.
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.