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

1966 Supreme(MP) 162

High Court of Madhya Pradesh
J. C. Shah, J. M. Shelat, JJ.
MUNICIPALITY OF TALODA - APPELLANT
Versus
CHARITY COMMISSIONER, BOMBAY & ORS. - RESPONDENTS
Civil Appeal No. 72 of 1965
Decided On : 26-09-1966

Advocates Appeared:
For Appellant : S. G. Patwardhan, R. R. Jahagirdar, V. G. Mudholkar, A G. Ratnaparkhi.
For Respondent: R. H. Dhebar, S. S. Javali, S. P. Nayar, S. S. Shukla.

A Municipality can hold property as a trustee of a public trust for the benefit of a section of the public, and the Charity Commissioner has the right to appeal against an adverse decision in a proceeding to which he is a party.

Headnote:

PUBLIC TRUST - BOMBAY PUBLIC TRUSTS ACT, 1950 - SECTION 19 - MUNICIPALITY HOLDING PROPERTY AS TRUSTEE - PUBLIC PURPOSE - RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE PURPOSE - SADHUS, SAINTS AND RELIGIOUS MENDICANTS - SECTION OF PUBLIC - CHARITY COMMISSIONER'S RIGHT TO APPEAL.

Fact of the Case:

Dagadu Khushal transferred property to the Municipality of Taloda for the purpose of providing shelter to "sadhus, saints and religious mendicants" and maintaining the samadhi of Nagabawa. The Assistant Charity Commissioner declared the property to be a public trust, but the District Court reversed this decision. The High Court restored the order of the Charity Commissioner.

Finding of the Court:

The Municipality held the property as a trustee of a public trust for the benefit of "sadhus, saints and religious mendicants", who formed a section of the public. The trust was not limited to the buildings on the land but extended to the entire property.

Issues: 1. Whether the Municipality held the property as a trustee. 2. Whether the property was held for a public purpose. 3. Whether the beneficiaries of the trust were a section of the public. 4. Whether the Charity Commissioner had the right to appeal against the decision of the District Court.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Municipality was bound by the terms of the deed of transfer, which specified that the property was to be used for the benefit of "sadhus, saints and religious mendicants". 2. The purpose of the trust was religious and charitable within the meaning of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. 3. "Sadhus, saints and religious mendicants" formed a section of the public, as they had a common bond of veneration for the samadhi of Nagabawa. 4. The Charity Commissioner was a party to the appeal and had the right to support his order before the District Court.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the order of the Charity Commissioner was restored.

JUDGMENT Shah J. – One Sambhusing applied under section 19 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 29 of 1950 for a declaration that City Survey Nos. 371 to 379 of Taloda were settled by one Dagadu Khushal in favour of the Municipality in 1883 for the benefit of the Johari Panch and for an order that the property be registered as property of a public trust under the Act. The Assistant Charity Commissioner who heard the petition by his order dated January 20, 1956, held that “there was no such institution known as Johari Panch”, and that the property in dispute had not been used for the benefit of thatcommunity, but Dagadu Khushal had transferred the property to the Municipality for the benefit of members of the public interested in the Samadhi of Nagabawa. The Assistant Charity Commissioner declared that there was a public trust and City Survey Nos. 371 to 379 of Taloda Municipality were the property of the Trust and that the Municipality held it as trustee of that Trust. That order was confirmed in appeal by the Charity Commissioner. In appeal, the District Court set aside the order of the Charity Commissioner and held that by the deed of transfer executed by Dagadu Khushal no trust was created, that in any event the trust was not a public trust and that the property in City Survey Nos. 371 to 379 was not the property of any such trust. In appeal under section 72 (4) of the Act, the High Court of Bombay reversed the order passed by the District Court and restored the order passed by the Charity Commissioner. The Municipality of Taloda has filed this petition with special leave.

2. A short history of the property may first be set out. Land which now bears City Survey Nos. 371 to 379 originally belonged to one Charandas who erected a ‘Dharamshala' thereon. On May 24th, 1878, Charandas sold the land and the Dharamshala to Dagadu Khushal purporting to transfer the property absolutely to the vendee. On August 27th, 1883, Dagadu Khushal executed a deed in favour of the Municipality of Taloda, the relevant clause of the deed (as translated in the judgment of the High Court) reads as follows:

    “Having released all my rights, interest and title in the property mentioned in the boundaries above, I am handing over to day all that property in the possession of the Municipality for the purpose of sarvajanik ham (public purpose) as it has been utilised upto date for shelter of Atit, Abhyagat, Sadhu, Sant etc. to be used in the same way as it has been used uptil now.”

      It was recited in the deed that in the property conveyed “there is a samadhi (grave) of Nagabawa”. The Municipality, pursuant to the deed, entered into the possession of the property. It appears that thereafter the Municipality made certain constructions which were used for its offices and for shops.

      3. On September 21st, 1936, the Municipality of Taloda filed a suit against one Baba Haridas Guru Shamdas Udasi for a declaration that the defendant had no right or interest over the land City Survey Nos. 371 to 379 and that the defendant had taken unlawful possession thereof and for an order that the obstruction raised by the defendant be removed, and possession of the land be awarded to the Municipality. In this suit it was claimed by the Municipality that it was in possession of the land for more than sixty years and the property was “utilised for municipal purposes and was enjoyed in all way for necessary municipal requirements”, but the defendant had made unauthorised construction thereon. Baba Haridas contended that the Municipality had no right to utilise the property for municipal purposes since it was transferred in trust for the residence of “sages, saints, guests, visitors and others of the Nanak Sect”, and the defendant being “a sage or saint of the Nanak Sect” had been residing in the property and was entitled to do so. This suit was decreed by the Subordinate Judge.

      4. In 1950 survey proceedings were started in the town of Taloda and an enquiry regarding the title to the lan

              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