JUDGMENT

MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

A short question that arises for consideration herein is whether a suit under Section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “the CPC”) having been instituted by two persons on obtaining the leave of the Court, can be maintained/ continued though one of the two persons / plaintiffs withdraws himself from the suit during its pendency resulting in a sole plaintiff alone remaining to prosecute the suit.

1.1. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the suit in C.S.No.232 of 2021.

2. Brief Facts:

2.1. The 1st appellant herein (1st defendant in the suit) is a Public Trust created under a Deed of Declaration of Trust dated 07.03.1961, registered as Document No.1100 of 1961. The Trust was created for religious and charitable purpose as set out in the Trust deed dated 16.03.1961. Subsequently, another Deed of Declaration of Trust dated 24.10.1964 was created and registered, in order to deal with the assets to meet the objects of the Trust as well as the management of the combined Trust. Thereafter, one more Trust was created on 01.09.1965 which was also duly registered.

st nd

2.2. The 1 and 2 respondents herein (plaintiffs 1 & 2 in the suit) viz., Mr.

Haridoss Purushothamdas and Mr.D.Parthasarathy filed the suit under Section 92 of the CPC as against the appellants herein viz., Sri Dwaraka Doss Goverdhan Doss and Sowbhagyavathy Gangabai Memorial Trust, and its two Trustees viz., Mr. Govinddas Purushothamdas and Mr. Bharat Kumar K Shah inter alia with the following prayers viz., a. To declare the removal of the 3rd appellant/ 3rd defendant viz., Mr.

Bharat Kumar K Shah from the office of the Managing Trustee.

rd b. Consequential injunction restraining the 3 defendant therein from interfering with the management of the 1st appellant/ 1st defendant Trust and other consequential relief.

2.3. The plaintiffs/ respondents herein also filed an application in A.No.1936 of 2021 seeking leave of this Court to institute the suit on the premise that the 3rd appellant herein (3rd defendant in the suit) who is acting as the Managing Trustee of the Trust has been mismanaging and misappropriating the Trust funds and properties, contrary to the objects of the Trust, taking undue advantage of the old age of the 2nd appellant herein (2nd defendant in the suit) viz., Mr. Govindas Purushothamdas. By an order dated 21.06.2021, leave was granted on the basis of the averments contained in the affidavit filed in support of the st application that the 1 Respondent herein is directly interested in the welfare of the Trust as one of the legal heirs of the founder Trustee and also entitled to be nd inducted as a Trustee and the 2 Respondent herein is associated with the Trust activities for a long time.

2.4. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the suit was registered as C.S.No.232 of

2021 along with two interim applications viz., O.A.No.436 of 2021 for grant of interim injunction restraining the 3rd appellant herein from interfering with the Management of the Trust pending disposal of the suit; and O.A.No.2542 of 2021 for appointment of Interim Administrator. Notice was ordered in both the applications and interim injunction was granted on 27.07.2021 in O.A.No.436 of

2021. Written statement was also filed by the appellants herein.

2.5. While so, an application in O.A.No.543 of 2022 was filed by the 2nd respondent herein and the 2nd plaintiff in the suit Mr.D.Parthasarathy seeking permission of the Court to delete his name from the array of parties in the suit in C.S.No.232 of 2021. In the affidavit filed by him, it was stated that he was not a st Trustee or a beneficiary of the 1 appellant Trust nor was he connected with the st affairs of the Trust except the fact that he was a well-wisher of the family of the 1 Respondent as well as the 2nd and 3rd appellants herein. It was further stated that being a senior citizen and of advanced age, he does not have any grievance against any of t