Madhya Pradesh High Court
Choithram Charitable Trust vs Satish Motiani on 6 June, 2022
Author: Satyendra Kumar Singh
Bench: Satyendra Kumar Singh
1 M.P.No.2317/2022
(Choithram Charitable Trust and others Vs. Satish Motiani and others)
Indore : Dated 6.6.2022
Shri Vivek Tankha, learned senior counsel with Shri Anshuman
Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Heard on I.A.Nos.3852/2022, 3902/2022, 3908/2022 and
3851/2022.
I.A.No.3852/2022 is an application seeking direction for
hearing the present petition during summer vacation, while
I.A.Nos.3902/2022 and 3908/2022 are the applications for grant of
exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned order dated
25.3.2022 and from filing of notarized copy of the petition in the
interest of justice.
Considering the impugned orders, nature of relief sought and
after due consideration the aforesaid three applications bearing
I.A.Nos.3852/2022, 3902/2022 and 3908/2022 are allowed.
I.A.No.3851/2022 is an application for staying the operation
and effect of the impugned orders dated 25.3.2022, 6.5.2022 and
13.5.2022.
This petition relates to Regular Civil Suit bearing No.RCS-
A/1255/2021 pending before the Court of 26 th Addl.District Judge,
Indore. The petitioners have filed the above civil suit to stop the
respondents No.2 to 6 from working as trustees of petitioner No.1
Trust stating therein that petitioners No.2 to 5 are the trustees of petitioner No.1 Trust since last thirty years, while respondent No.1 violating the Trust Deed dated 29.12.1970 of petitioner No.1 and 2 M.P.No.2317/2022 (Choithram Charitable Trust and others Vs. Satish Motiani and others) M.P.Public Trust Act, 1951 erroneously made respondents No.2 to 6 trustees of petitioner No.1 Trust. The learned trial Court vide order dated 18.11.2021 passed the order against respondents for maintaining status quo in relation to the properties, accounts and documents of the Trust and not to tamper/changes in any manner. Vide orders dated 29.11.2021, 17.12.2021, 1.2.2022 and 9.3.2022, order dated 18.11.2021 of maintaining status quo was extended till 25.3.2022, but the same was not mentioned in the order dated 25.3.2022. On 6.5.2022 when petitioners sought for the extension of the interim relief dated 18.11.2021, their prayer was rejected on the ground that order dated 25.3.2022 did not specifically extended the interim relief dated 18.11.2021. Petitioners filed an application for clarification of the order dated 6.5.2022 to the extent that direction requiring respondents to maintain status quo as on 18.11.2021 was rejected vide impugned order dated 13.5.2022.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is settled law that interim orders need not be extended specifically and are deemed to be continued unless otherwise set aside, modified by a specific direction. Learned trial Court has erred in dismissing petitioners' application seeking clarification of the order dated 6.5.2022 only on the basis that the purpose of the status quo order dated 18.11.2021 was to maintain status quo till the presence of the respondents in the suit. A bare perusal of the previous orders clearly shows that till 25.3.2022 respondents were directed to maintain status quo and extended the 3 M.P.No.2317/2022 (Choithram Charitable Trust and others Vs. Satish Motiani and others) protection of the status quo order, without limitation of the words "till next date". The order dated 25.3.2022 nowhere stated that the status quo order dated 18.11.2021 was to operate till the respondents had entered appearance and filed their replies to the petitioners' application for interim relief. The respondents neither filed application for vacation of the status quo order nor the parties argued on the said issue. In fact the order dated 25.3.2022 was explicitly silent on the issue of status quo and it was an inadvertent error on the part of the learned trial Court not to mention the continuation of status quo as per order dated 18.11.2021, hence, the impugned order is patently illegal and liable to be set aside. Therefore, operation and effect of the same be stayed.
As per impugned order dated 13.5.2022 it is apparent that learned trial Court vide order dated 18.11.2021 directed the respondents to maintain status quo as on 18.11.2021 in relation to the petitioner No.1 Trust and in relation to the property, accounts and documents of petitioner No.1 Trust. It is also apparent that above order of status quo was extended from time-to-time by orders dated 29.11.2021, 17.12.2021, 1.2.2022 and 9.3.2022 without limitation of words "till next date".
In the aforesaid circumstances it is appropriate to issue notice of this stay application bearing I.A.No.3851/2022 alongwith notice of the petition to the respondents. Let P.F.be paid within seven working days. Notices be made returnable within six weeks.
4 M.P.No.2317/2022(Choithram Charitable Trust and others Vs. Satish Motiani and others) In the meantime respondents shall maintain status quo as it exists today in relation to petitioner No.1 Trust and in relation to the property, accounts and documents of the petitioner No.1 Trust.
List on 18.7.2022.
C.c.as per rules.
(Satyendra Kumar Singh) Judge Patil Digitally signed by SHAILESH PATIL Date: 2022.06.07 13:59:59 +05'30'