Madras High Court
K.S.Sriram vs Kuchalambal Charities
Author: V.Parthiban
Bench: V.Parthiban
A.No.3340 of 2019 in C.S.SR.No.55800 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON 26.04.2021
DELIVERED ON : 29.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN
APPLICATION NO.3340 OF 2019
IN C.S.SR.NO.55800 OF 2019
1. K.S.Sriram
2. K.S.Ramasubramanian
3. M.Sriram .. Applicants/Plaintiffs
versus
1. Kuchalambal Charities
rep. by its Managing Trustee,
K.C.Harendran, having office
at No.122, Tenth Main Road,
First Block, Jaya Nagar,
Bangalore-560 011.
2. K.C.Harendran
3. K.H.Chandrika
4. K.S.Mohan .. Respondents/Defendants
1
http://www.judis.nic.in
A.No.3340 of 2019 in C.S.SR.No.55800 of 2019
Prayer: This Application is filed, seeking to grant leave to institute the suit before this
Court under Section 92(1) of the Civil Procedure Code.
For Applicants/Plaintiffs : Mr.M.Balasubramanian
For Respondents/Defendants : Mr.R.Subramanian
ORDER
This Application has been filed by the applicants/plaintiffs, seeking to grant leave to to institute the suit before this Court under Section 92(1) of the Civil Procedure Code.
2. The Applicants are the plaintiffs. They filed the above Civil Suit for the following reliefs, viz., rd st
a) removing the 3 defendant from the Trusteeship of the 1 st defendant Trust and co-opt new persons as Trustees of the 1 defendant Trust;
b) Framing a scheme for the proper and smooth and effective functioning and carrying out its objects and the charitable activities and the safest upkeep with all necessary safeguarding and 2 http://www.judis.nic.in A.No.3340 of 2019 in C.S.SR.No.55800 of 2019 checking measures to avoid any future malpractice, misappropriation, st mal-administration of the 1 defendant Trust;
c) direct the defendants 2 to 4 to render a full and true st account of all the affairs and transaction of the 1 defendant Trust from the year 2015-2018;
d) direct the defendants 2 to 4 to produce the copy of the reconstituted Trust Deed after the death of the Three founder Trustees and
e) for cost of the suit.
st
3. According to the applicants/plaintiffs, the 1 applicant/plaintiff is the st second son of the founder Trustee, namely, S.M.Subramanian Chettiar. The 1 respondent/defendant Trust was formed in the year 1962 and a Trustee Deed was executed on 07.03.1962 and the same was registered with the Sub Registrar, Bangalore.
st At the time of formation of the Trust, the father of the 1 applicant/plaintiff, his brother K.C.Chakrapani Chettiar, T.N.C.Satagopan and the son of K.C.Chakrapani Chettiar, nd namely, K.C.Harendran, 2 respondent/defendant were made as Trustees. It is the case of the applicants/plaintiffs that the Trust is a public charitable Trust and after the death 3 http://www.judis.nic.in A.No.3340 of 2019 in C.S.SR.No.55800 of 2019 st of the father of the 1 applicant/plaintiff, who was the founder of the Trust and also after the death of another Trustee, namely, T.N.C.Satagopan, the Trust was taken over by the defendants 2 to 4 and they colluded together and indulged in mismanagement of the Trust and misappropriation of the funds of the Trust and there is no transperancy of accounts of the Trust in regard to the distribution of scholarships to the poor students and medical expenses to needy public and also in conversion of Kalyana mandampam as commercial complex and the present Trustees are using the Trust properties as their own. Therefore, according to the applicants/plaintiffs, unless a scheme is framed to regularize the activities of the Trust, the very object of the Trust will get defeated. Hence the suit. For the purpose of instituting the suit against the first respondent/defendant which is a public Trust, the present Application is taken out by the applicants/plaintiffs, seeking to grant leave to institute the suit under Section 92 of the CPC.
4. Resisting the Application, the respondents/defendants filed a counter st affidavit, inter alia stating that the 1 respondent/Trust has its registered office at 4 http://www.judis.nic.in A.No.3340 of 2019 in C.S.SR.No.55800 of 2019 Bangalore and it does not own any property in Chennai and the property situated in Chennai is only a lease hold property and hence, the application before this Court is without any jurisdiction and hence, the same is liable to be dismissed in limine. It is st further stated that the 1 applicant used to maintain the bookings of Kuchalambal Kalyana Mandapam at Chennai and he was misrepresenting himself as a trustee and st since there were complaints against the 1 applicant, in the meeting of the Board of trustees held on 12.06.2017, it was resolved that the bookings shall not be made by the st 1 applicant and he was informed to handover all the account books of Kalyana nd th Mandapam. He addressed a letter dated 15.08.2017 to the 2 and 4 respondents, seeking to appoint him as a trustee of the Trust and his request was rejected vide letter st dated 31.08.2017. Since 1 applicant was informed to stop dealing with any of the activities connected with the Trust and his request to appoint him as a trustee was rejected, the applicants/plaintiffs resorted to filed the suit and the present application. Hence, the respondents sought for rejection of the Application. 5 http://www.judis.nic.in A.No.3340 of 2019 in C.S.SR.No.55800 of 2019
5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the entire materials available on record.
st
6. It is not in dispute that the 1 applicant is the son of the Founder of the Trust, namely, S.M.Subramanian Chettiar. Even as per the counter affidavit filed on st behalf of the respondents, the 1 applicant has been maintaining the bookings of the Kuchalambal Kalyana Mandapam at Chennai. While so, it is the case of the applicants/plaintiffs that the Trust is a public charitable Trust and after the death of the st father of the 1 applicant/plaintiff, who was the founder of the Trust and also after the death of another Trustee, namely, T.N.C.Satagopan, the Trust was taken over by the defendants 2 to 4 and they colluded together and indulged in mismanagement of the Trust and misappropriation of the funds of the Trust and there is no transparancy of accounts of the Trust in regard to the distribution of scholarships to the poor students and medical expenses to needy public and also in conversion of Kalyana mandampam as commercial complex. In such circumstances, in order to regulate the activities of the 6 http://www.judis.nic.in A.No.3340 of 2019 in C.S.SR.No.55800 of 2019 rd public charitable Trust by way of framing a Scheme and removing the 3 defendant from Trusteeship, the applicants/plaintiffs filed the suit and now sought for grant of leave to institute the suit as provided under Section 92(1) of CPC.
7. A suit under Section 92 CPC, is a suit of a special nature which presupposes the existence of a public trust of a religious or charitable character. The first thing that has to be considered in this case is whether the suit is of the kind as would fall within the four corners of Section 92 CPC. It is apparent that before Section 92 CPC is attracted, there must be (1) as alleged breach of trust; (2) the trust may be express or constructive; (3) the trust, however, must have been created for public purposes (of a charitable or religious nature); and (4) the suit must be instituted so as to obtain a decree of the nature indicated in clauses (a) to (h) of sub-Section (1) of Section 92 CPC. It has to be seen as to whether the present case satisfies these tests. From the averments in the plaint it is st clear that the the 1 defendant Trust is a registered charitable Trust and created for rd public purpose and the prayers sought for by the plaintiffs are, for removal of 3 7 http://www.judis.nic.in A.No.3340 of 2019 in C.S.SR.No.55800 of 2019 defendant from Trusteeship and for framing a scheme for effective functioning of the Trust and carrying out its objects and to direct the defendants 2 to 4 to render full and true accounts of the Trust from the year 2015 to 2018. In the plaint, the applicants/plaintiffs have specifically averred that the defendants 2 to 4 colluded together and indulged in mismanagement of the Trust and misappropriation of the funds of the Trust and there is no transperancy of accounts of the Trust in regard to the distribution of scholarships to the poor students and medical expenses to needy public and also in conversion of Kalyana mandampam as commercial complex. These disputed facts are to be proved by the plaintiffs by letting in evidence during the trial of the suit. Now, on prima facie consideration, this Court is of the view that the averments as well as the prayer made in the plaint are in conformity with Section 92 (1) of CPC. This Court finds that prayer (i) will fall under Section 92(1)(a) of CPC; Prayer (ii) will fall under Section 92(1)(g) of CPC and Prayer (iii) will fall under Section 91(1)(d). Whatever objections raised by the respondents/defendants resisting the present application, can be made to defend the suit. Hence, leave is granted as sought for. 8 http://www.judis.nic.in A.No.3340 of 2019 in C.S.SR.No.55800 of 2019
8. Accordingly, the Application is allowed. The Registry is directed to number the suit and post in regular course.
Suk 29.04.2021 9 http://www.judis.nic.in A.No.3340 of 2019 in C.S.SR.No.55800 of 2019 V.PARTHIBAN, J. suk Pre delivery Order in A.No.3340 of 2019 29.04.2021 10 http://www.judis.nic.in