Madhya Pradesh High Court
Virendra Singh Bhandari vs The State Of M.P. on 21 August, 2023
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
- : 1 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH
AT I N D O R E
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
ON THE 21st OF AUGUST, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 633 of 2005
BETWEEN:-
SHRI VIRENDRA SINGH BHANDARI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI VIVEK PATWA,ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
REGISTRAR OF PUBLIC TRUST COLLECTORATE, MOTI
2.
TABELA, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
NANDLAL BHANDARI HIGH SCHOOL TRUST 50, BAJAJ KHANA
3.
CHOWK, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
JASBIR SINGH S/O LATE SHRI GAJAENDRASINGH BHANDARI,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS
4.
NANDANVAN, 1, MAHATMA GANDHI MARG, INDORE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
SATISH KUMAR S/O LATE SHRI GAJENDRASINGH BHANDARI,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS
5.
NANDANVAN, 1, MAHATMA GANDHI MARG, INDORE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
DILIP KUMAR S/O RAJENDRA SINGH BHANDARI, AGED
6. ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS NANDANVAN, 1,
MAHATMA GANDHI MARG, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: REENA SUDHIR
DAS
Signing time: 23-Aug-23
12:10:50 PM
- : 2 :-
BABULAL KHANDELWAL S/O RAMCHANDRA KHANDELWAL
7. THROUGH LRS. SHRIRAM KHANDELWAL, AGED ABOUT 50
YEARS, 1, NORTH HATHIPALA, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
PRAMOD KHANDELWAL S/O RAMCHANDRA KHANDELWAL,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOT KNOWN TO THE
8.
PETITIONER KHANDELWAL HOSUE,WRIT TOWN, JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
SMT. NILIMA W/O RAM KUMAR KHANDELWAL, AGED ABOUT
9. 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER 1,
NORTH HATHIPALA, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI KOUSTUBH PATHAK, GOVT.ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS
No. 1 & 2)
( NONE FOR THE RESPONDENTS 3 TO 6)
(SHRI YOGESH CHANDRA MARKAN, ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NO 7 to 9)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This petition coming on for this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this present petition challenging the validity of the order dated 11/02/2005; whereby, the Registrar, Public Trust granted permission to respondents no 3 to 6 to sale the trust property,i.e, 15 Khajuri Bajar, MG Road, (New) 164,165 and 166 area 19050 Sq ft. in exercise the powers conferred under Section 14(2) of the M.P. Public Trust Act,1951 (hereinafter to be referred to as Act of 1951).
1. The petitioner is the grandson of late Shri Motilalji Bhandari, who was a member of M/s Nandlal Bhandari & Sons, a Hindu Undivided Family firm, which created a public Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA SUDHIR DAS Signing time: 23-Aug-23 12:10:50 PM
- : 3 :-
trust on 07/7/1939 in the name of Nandlal Bhandari High School Trust. The trust deed is filed as Annexure P-1. The intention of the creation of the trust was to run the Higher Secondary school for providing Education. Since the condition of the school building deteriorated beyond the repair and renovation, therefore, the Trustees passed a resolution for saleing the property . They approached the Registrar, Public Trust by way of an application under Section 14 of the Act of 1951 seeking permission to sale the school building. The Registrar, Public Trust considered the resolution provision of the Trustee, and condition of the school building and accordingly, vide order dated 11.02.2005, granted the permission to sale the property.
2. Thereafter the school building was demolished and the land was sold by registered sale deed dated 20/04/2005 to respondents No. 7 to 9.
3. The petitioner has filed this petition challenging Annexure P-2 and sale deed interalia on two grounds firstly that the Registrar has travelled beyond its power conferred under Section 14 of the Act of 1951 by granting the permission to sale the trust property contrary to the will of the creators of the trust and secondly that Clause (9) of Trust deed provides that the trust property shall revert back to the proprietors of the trust.
4. Counsel for the respondents who have opposed the Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA SUDHIR DAS Signing time: 23-Aug-23 12:10:50 PM
- : 4 :-
prayer by filling the reply. It is submitted that the father of the petitioner being the son of Motilalji Bhandari Shri Virendra Singh Bhandari had filed a civil suit which was registered as Civil Suit No.11-A/2005, before the District Court for a permanent injunction seeking an injunction against the Trustees to sale the suit property along with an application for a temporary injunction, hence this present petition is not maintainable.
5. The petitioner has also filed a contempt petition challenging the action of the respondents by which they sold the property in violation of the stay granted by this Court.
6. Shri Vivek Patwa, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Section 14 of the Act of 1951 specially prohibits the Registrar to pass any order granting permission to sale if there is no provision in the Trust deed. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that Clause (9) of the Trust deed provides that if for any reason the Trust fails to work, the property and the money shall revert to the proprietors and shall be their personal property. Since the Grandfather of the petitioner was one of the trustees and proprietors of the Trust, therefore, he is entitled to inherit the property.
7. Learned Government Advocate and Shri Makan learned counsel support the impugned action of the Registrar.
Appreciations & Conclusion Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA SUDHIR DAS Signing time: 23-Aug-23 12:10:50 PM
- : 5 :-
8. Clause (9) of the Trust Deed is reproduced below :-
"9. If for any reason the Trust fails by reason of the Institution ceasing to work, the proprietors shall have the power to revoke the Trust and the properties and the monies may remain in balance then shall revert to the proprietors and shall be their personal property."
10. It is correct that there is a provision for reverting back the property of the trust and money to the proprietor only when the proprietor decides to revoke the Trust. Only after revocation of the Trust, the properties are liable to be reverted back. It is an admitted position that the trust is still in existence and the proprietors have not taken any decision to revoke the trust. Hence the first ground raised by Shri Patwa is not tenable and hence rejected.
11. So far the impugned action of the Registrar is in violation of Section 14 of the Act of 1951 as concerned the clause (9) of the Trust deed does not prohibits saleing the trust property. As held above property and money are liable to revert back if the trust is revoked In Clause (9) there is no such prohibition of sale of the Trust Property. Even otherwise under proviso to section 14 the direction in the instrument of trust or any other direction given under this Trust deed, contrary to that, the Registrar shall not refuse its sanction in respect of any transaction specified in Sub Section (1).
12 Even otherwise after the order of the Registrar trust's properties were put to sale and the civil suit was filed by the Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA SUDHIR DAS Signing time: 23-Aug-23 12:10:50 PM
- : 6 :-
father of the petitioner remained unsuccessful, therefore, the petitioner has no independent locus to challenge the impugned action of the respondents 3 to 6.
13. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.
(VIVIEK RUSIA) JUDGE das Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA SUDHIR DAS Signing time: 23-Aug-23 12:10:50 PM