Karnataka High Court
Donor Bellur Thammaiah'S Charities And vs G M Gadkar on 26 February, 2010
Equivalent citations: 2010 (4) AIR KAR R 306
Author: Jawad Rahim
Bench: Jawad Rahim
IN
BETWEEN:
1
v
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE DAY OF FEBRUARY,
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MR. JOST1cE~JA,wA.'O A
C.R.P No. 258 OE
. DONOR BELLUR THAM'M».AiTAH'S A
CHAR_mES AND SR1? E$_'J\.!,'_3;~.,_\.*'*RAI'v'}AOAS_.
MELU SAKKARE 'O,1RRA_;'RA'vIDx<A',~--_
VARDHAKA TRu":1T,..M--\z_SO'RE"(Ry " _
1" MAIN ROAD, SA.RASWAT%*iIP'uI'RA--M,
MYSORE*--a570;U'09* " ._ I
BY {TS 'r~'R.E-'_'S1::>=ENE A~ND'vSE€iRE_T.ARv
YAJA M ANA" ' BE .A' THA rm A1A H
A1ND"v~T,HA¥;.A:s(:r~1.A"yAD"ATHVQ.RE SADDIVIL
j'L1NGA,;1.AH T}jR'uST._ASBREv1ATED AS
TTL . E Dur;;A_T';ON<v.A,L' ~LN'STITUTE
MAIN ROAD,SARASWATHIPURAM
MVSOTRE 5'7{; .009.
BY ITF3 'RRE'S1D-ENA.* AND SECRETARY
,_S:RI..,_%<.L.STRA3"BHUSAN
S/O_ LATE v S LINGAIAH, ,
*!??fRESIDE.NT, T.T.L. T-RUST (R)
vvN©,,27f9-3~," BRINGHTON,
8"' -STREET BOOKLYN,
§ju"E'J\i..~'YORK W 112 345 USA
H N ASHWATHA NARAYANA
EXECUTIVE ADMINISTRATOR,
' NOD10/A2, 5"" CROSS,
KAMAKSHI HOSPITAL ROAD,
KUVEMPU NAGAR,
MYSORE 570 009
34%
AND:
3. SRI K V VENKATESH
D§PARTMENT OF %Vl.B.A.,
ADMINISTRATOR, T.T.L INSTITUTIONS,
UPPARA HOSTEL BUILDING,
I MAIN ROAD, SARASWATHIPURAM,
MYSORE A 9
6. SRI A MAN}UNATH
NO331, STATE BANK OF M¥SO'RE-I'
ROAD, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB \_ " *
ISTASE, VISHWESHWA'--RANA(3AR,,
MYSORE «W 570 808 " "
7. DR.V P REDDY, -I V
\/INAYAKA NURSING, r--1OmIé *
NO.1750, II CROSS, ' '
KRISHNAr»4uRT:I+'r'I-Rt};RAr«Ig_
MYSOREe_'5--7o¥O0<; " g
., 2 _ PETITIONERS
(BY SR1 ._ I; VIS H'wjjA.,:\I'AT}I, 'ADI/. ,)
em I '.
AG.EO.4I YEARS
SOc'IAL~TwO'R:<I:R,.-- ND 408
CITB, 'END ST-AGE, RUVEMRONAGAR,
3 _; MYSORE V
F3RIA,S.vIjS'«.}-{OTAPPA
'*AG.ED..AE§Ol.jT 49 YEAS
AIS/IO"I'SAR.NIé OOWDA
'SAO,vI'Dv"A SCHOOL HEAD MASTER
NO' 886/4, CENTRAL LIBRARY
L%UI'%_D1NG NS ROAD,
I LAKSHMIPURAM, MYSORE 570 004
' "SR1 M v ANATHAPADAMANABHA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
MP VENKATESHAIAH
PWD CONTRACTOR
A
CC)
NO 1085, KURUBATGERI I MAIN
LASHKAR MOHALLA, MYSORE 570 001
SR: P S VISHAKANTAIAH
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
S/O LATESUSBAIAH
TOWN PANCHAYATH PRESID_E»NT_
UPPARABEEDI '
PERIYAPATTANA TOWN AND'TALU+<'
MYSORE DISTRICT
SR1 K R MALLAIAH
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS _' ._
S/O KARIMANCREOOWDA S' S A
RETIRED A.E.O AN-D {R.RESS1:1D;EN"TU,';T _
PERIYAPATNA TALUK, _Uf5.P'AQA:'SAi*J.5A.H
ARAuMARA1DA;<OR'RAU_'J v'ILYL.A(3E.,
BETTAD_ARU..R1'A P@ST:, .R'ER1YAR'ATNA TALUK
5R.1...T PADTv:~Y.ANTAETHAE '
S/O LATE. _THIfA M M'A,1'Aé--n .
A--QED'AVSOUT__52_YEARS' -
NC-.892/93, 'r<A~rx1TH_A'RA.JA URS ROAD,
I MAM TLAK'SHM1R:_J&R.AM
VMYSORVE V_57o',-302;.
A"'.T SO%\éA'S'H'EKA RA PPA
S/'O_n,T'H,1MMARRA
V': "'3w_IOR ..ER1SINEER
" .__AGEDv..Ai3,OUT 44 YEARS
NO.3["u{'JWW QUARTERS
YACDAVIGIRE MYSORE 570 020
SRIEKALASE GOWDA
{AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
'S/O KALASE GOWDA
EX PRESIDENT OF NAGANAHALLI VILLAGE
PANCHAYATH NAGANAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST
HD KOTE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT
(TY
10
12
I3]
SR1 MANJUNATHA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
S/O LATE THAMMATAH SHETTY
AGRTCULTDRIST, l-i.P\§O SO
SHIVAJI ROAD, H.D. KOTE TALUK
MYSORE DISTRECT
SR1 MAHADEVA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
S/O BELLA SHETTY " _ "
TALUK PANCHAYATH MEMBER
ANNn_:R_u.:<ER.: \!I1.__L.AGE A_E.\é.§"P_Of,_T%'
GUNDALRET TALOR..¢_ ' ' - "
SR1 G C KRISHNA SVVAMY' A _
AGED ABOUT 46 S/O'~R.cHAT<..T<A1AH
RRES1DETxsT.TALuT_< L;'PPARASANC5.HA
AN NU.F?..UI<E§§I_ _--tuT~LLAG-E. ANDQPOST
GUNDLU ;PKETV.TA----iJJF<'--:5.':1 " -- "
SR1 R" M}fMAHIA'DEvA."'SH E17'?
AG E D ABOUT" 40_ Y*EA'R..S' -
S/'O M.ADASHEESTT'Y,.__E'X' RRESIDENT
HAR"ADAHA'Lr_I"\/TELAGE PANCHAYATH
BANDI'GE'RE_v1LLAG"E,
HATARADA§\'JA._H&ALLE POST,
'CEAAMARAJANAGARA TALUK
" A RDA SHETTY
%TAGE'D..A'3jO'uT 48 YEARS
'S/O.KTEg=eGRA_ SHETTY
TE-ACHER BHAGTRATHA NACSAR
DOUEELE ROAD
~ CHAMARA3ANAGA TOWN AND TALUK '
'SR: G CHIKKATHANDA SHETTY
S/O LATE GURUVA
SHETTY AGED ABOUT 74 YEAS
RETIRED PHYSCIAL EDUCATEON TEACHER AND
(RM
15
16
17
EX PRESIDENT OF MADHUVANAHALLI VILLAGE_.~.__
PANCHAYATH WATER DEVINER
AND INTERNATIONAL
ATHLET, VICEPRESIDENT KARNATAKA ,_
ATHLET ASSN BANGALORE No.7/479, M_.GSvJ_'R "
COLLEGE I
KOLLEGAL TOWN AND TALus1<E;'_571 ;44o"~----.S_1. '
SR1 S SHIVANNA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
S/O MULURA SIDDA SHE-TTY
RETIRED SENIOR AUDITQR'-.
NO 2-6:8,. UPPARA STRRET-.__ «
KOLLEGAL MOLE; KOLLE'G'A'LA..'T.A'Lu._K
KOLLEGAL TALUK----.__ _ .
Y K NAGARAJU '
AGED 5; YEARS S
S/O KUI';JNAg:SS+;«.EfTTfY';_
RETIRED"_H.IGH_SGHjOVO~L'T4:EAD MASTER Y.i< MOLE
VILLA{§uE,'i..A;5'Y1BLE'POLST, Y'ELAr}:»JDuR TALUK
c.J~+A--MA_ RAJA'r<:;:AGA-R' 'DISTRICT
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O M'AHADEjvA SHETTY
'4';jA'DvOcAT'E,__VDAVANGAT BEED1
..'__"'YA,LAI"~J.DUR TO"v'Tif\J AND TALUK
CH'AMAR.AJANAGAR DISTRICT
SR: AGARAJD
I 'AGEDABOUT 40 YEARS
S/O ERA SHETTY
HGSAKEMPAIAHNA HUNDI
KEMPAIAHNAHUNDI POST
NARASIPURA TALUK
'MYSORE DISTRICT
SRII MADA SHETTY
AGED 45 YEARS S/O IAVARA SHETTY
dflv
20
21
22
23
AGE'O..AE§OOT 50 YEARS
-- TMTEELE GOWDA
, ' AGRICMORIST KATANALU VILLAGE,
CHANO'AOA:.OR POST
(3
AGRICULTURIST, KARUHATTI VILLAGE
AND POSTJVIUGURL} HOBLI
T NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT
SRI PARASHURAMA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
S/O LATE MALAYA SHETTY
RETO TAHSILDAR, GOLURU VILLAGE -:' --. *
VIDYAPEETA POST, '
NANJANGUD TOWN AND TALUK
MYSORE DISTRICT ' '
SR1 M MASANA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT' 63 Y~::+i.ARS"T
S/O LATE RACHA";'Z§HET'{ ,
PWD CLASS E CONTR1ACTO'R_? _ _
BEHIND ARAOOvA:.A*SHRAM--AfNAN3AVNC;uO TOWN
AND TALUI~<, _ _
MYSOR..E--..DI{§TRICT _ _
SRI OA.vI'-G'O,wOA'--~ I * ._
AG Eb-AE:OUT::Lg4'7 YEARS _
S'-,_/O __THA'M"T-4A_1'AH'SCR.OOL TEACHER
HONNENAHAL;LY"R_OA..O..-
E><TENSLION'--AREA.,VSALIORAMA
VILLAGE 'AND', ROST"~;T<.R. NAGAR TALUK
M"T<.SORE"'O:_STR1CT
SRiAAK.iN..THAMMA1AH
K.R"; NAGAR TALUK
A MYSORE DISTRICT
*OR C G RAMACHANDRAIAH
RMO CHINMAYA MISSION
HOSPITAL, INDIRANAGAR
BANGALORE
gfl"
25
26
27
28
29
SMT RADHA RAMADAS
W/O LATE DR RAMADAS
VICE PRESIDENT
NO 75, RAJAJINAGAR
BANGALORE 560010
DR SHANTHA
TTL INSTITUTEONS
DPPARA HOSTEL BUILDING , _
E MAIN RDAD, SARASwAAT':-.1_1RuRA;v;"
MYSORE 9 '
BTSATHYANARAFEANA
S/D LATE SELLDR A 'fmAMM--A..IA~L1'»,,,
KOTANG ERI STRE ET, ;_NEA-R1'T»EM_RLE»..LA~KE
BELLUR POS3T,NAc3AM.ANGALA " '
TALUK M_ANDY.A D§ISTR§,C'|"-._
DR M S :<.A--:\:1'-1'?'..__ 1, _
1 23, 19TH CZROSS,-.8"T_i~:.. MAIN
NE)'-'LR' --B.D'".A COf13'-'?PL"E.X}VIJA'1"Ai*§EAGAR
BZANGAL0R5..,5'S.00«A<;,6'~-._ . '
DRSTN LPF{A'KA'fA,H
601, 18TH M/«~..,IA:,.,_2'A.'-LR CROSS,
_;B'SL<, II STALSE,
__"3B/ANGALORE -
' = A Sr-41,T*:<;' SRAGYA
_ .SEvC'§1.E'°A'P;'f
V D/O '\:'~.}3.0":L1NGA1AH
ND' 2€»,"NEW NO 1188
E?~AL;.i\i<R£SHNA RAD RDAD
CHAMARMAPURAM
A :""~~«_.MvSDRE 570 004
K L KRWASHANKAR
S/O Y S LINGAIAH
2612, BALAKRISHNA RAG ROAD
W
CHAMARAJAPURAIVI
MYSORE 570 004
RESPONOEHTS--.___
(By SMT M P GEETHA OEVI, ADV.,)
THIS CRP FILES {E/$ 1:5 CPC AGAINST"--THAE"Q"R¥j'ERA
DATED:21.1.2006 PASSED Il\§ MISCEASEM__si_O.,4/'--2'oQ5 O~N__
THE FILE OF THE PRL.DISTF',IECT_< JUDGE}; M'Y.S=OR-E, *
ALLOWING THE PETITION FILEO ti/S 92' {1} R;/W.__S*,1.51"C_PC
SEEKING LEAVE OE THE COURT "TO 1_iN*E5TIiI'~tJTE T&HE"'~St3iIT
W3 92 CPC. TV " '
THIS PETITION IS cO:vTI't\IcV§"iOi\§ EOEEATOPIIISSION THIS
DAY THIS COURT MADE THE E_O.i;LOw.Ii\éO:~
ve2IOROEg<O,T.
This reviS_i:On__ uni-:I'é%" S1é_§ctj'oli;--_IIV5 «.o'fV""the Code of Civil
l3l'{)C€3(::*:l,ll'€' the Order dated 21~O1~2006 in
Misc. Case NoI4»/A2fiiQ5:_4"o_n""Ehe file of the Principal District
}udg;e,* [\.'lySOre, grantingT relief under Section 92 (1) read
K'wjAtl*i .Se.¢tiO'iT.A_._15Zl. Code Of Civil Procedure to irastitute suit
Donor Bellur Thammaiah'S Charities & Sri
SW'a_my___v'Rairrrlat§as Melu Sakkare Uopara Vidya Vardhaka
Vi Tryst,' M-§'SO re.
The petitioners are members of the Board of
it -«Thrust in governance and have questioned the grant of leave.
ex
3. I have heard learned counsel Sri G.L.Visi'iwanati*i
for Qetitioners and Smt. M,P. Geetha Devi the
respondents and examined the records in sispp.le.ifnent'ati(;n
thereto.
4, Before I advert to the:'cOin'te'ntiouS'~i_ssL.ie:"iii-failseid
hw ' r
kl] c.. H.
factual matrix is necessary.
One Sri i€3.A. Tharri-rnalilahlilof--«._l\*iel'un__'_F3ai<i<are tippara
Community, (_3oi5t.ractoi'__ by p'rofes'siiona__l.jeing man of means,
was the'._wpV'l'i'gV;iVvht of the members of that
Commui-1it'y«.in particu_lla'r_:a'nd..--other students in general, who
haveV_pLiirsti"i'nqV'edtu-cation'.facing all odds. With a view to
"'«..,iiirovide,.\---('t-siidence"i'r'i'"'i3ellur to such deserving students and
:vi.ew4"to.::i::ovide in Mysore District and also to provide
basic iiec'es~si't'ies and amenities, he desired to construct
\,%iostel"._'A?-with that main obiect he aeplied to and was
"iflsi_.i_cc'r";~ssftil in obtaining grant of land from the then City
improvement 3'rust Board (in short 'CITB'). The CITB in its
Board Meeting dated 25--324941 resolved and granted to
air
he learned co: rise! on 'f:io'%;--lf} side'; a brief .t'i.F31'~3.!'.E?£'iC€ tn '
6. In this manner, additional land, apart from the
exlsting building, was also granted.
continued to manage the hostel and the
acquired and desired the Trust be-"ex~p.resrsly_vV'4erie,atetl.,'.'_}_ I'i'i_
fact, it ls not in dtspute that %molied7tr{;~slt"'Caihegfln
soon after the land was acdu~;.rfe'~do %nltV%a.|__%y' .an'~d "i<xo'stei":was"~'
built and made available'. to the irnpiied
trust under the Presidentsh%o>.o'f::'th:eil'V:_fo:lJ'ii.der successfully
fulfilled its Ilavllalcres was made
véde item Bflhammalah was
the foijnderV:a:nd.':':::¥fi="es'%'de'nt impléed trust from its
inception' adrnintstration wtth the able
aid and a"ssis'tanC._eA'~.of'«.l.4-his son~in--law Y.S. Lingasah, a
.£~_\dvoaeate.....a«nd man of repute being President of
Bar"_Ass'oC%iaVt'i.o.n, Mumcipal President and Honarary
Ma,gihstrate'Vl3'i_at:; K.R.Nagar. He worked as Manager and
Secretary of Vidyarthmilaya.
if 7. However, on 14A11a1965 as per the wishes of
l V' "the donor Bflhammalah, he assumed Office of the President
at
and continued to work in that capacity during the iife time of
the founder. The founder died during June In
fuifiiiqément of the desire of the donor, '(.3 Lingaiaih
trust deed on 25~O5~:974, registered at
1975 in the Office of the Registrar, inother..ca.i:iar:'it§{"-o'f'*<i;iie
President and the trust thusare-noitnevriciattivvred»,a_.5mfloharfiii
Beilur Thammaiah's Charitie;:._:&.V§ri
Me-iu Sakkare Uppafa.._i?idyia \{.ai9ci£:'¢"zl.§a'i __Trust, Mysore.
8. By _v;--rtue implied trust
become the=fr;;&sit._no_rr.ifnatin'§"Vcertain persons as
trzxsteeisfw"ofTtiwe'trus't'e'esV died during the term and
management'coVn'tin;;ed.._:ft'o.ifbe with vs. Lingaiah. During
this vP'€V"iodi,""~aVoart'V-.fro:n"itVem No.2 of the piaint Schedoie,
'"'«._ano:sth~er..iiaiii.d was'a"is'oVgranted vide order No. LND :09/8S~
:'d'aite'do_:V2v'G"--'£i8'+-.1986 by the Deputy Commissioner, Mysore.
Since Uié--:'j_i'*ff:iC]Uir'Ei'T"1€l'i'[ of the trust increased and in
'v._fuifiiin"ien't of the aim and object, it was decided to eniarge
":°it.s:activities for its smooth functioning, \/ZS. Lingaiah
registered another instrument dated O8--O7~2008 caiied as
Addenda and Corrigenda to the earlier deed {eferred to
ti?"
above, thereby enlisting three more trustees and it was duiy
registered.
9. Dr. Kt. Ramadas, the first grant__.3~,§Vg;>n:'oVf.i'y:'E3ei'iti_Tr
Afharnmaiah and the eldest son Y,.S,__Ling'aia'ii;'_'i~ih'o iwgggsali
leading Psychiatrist, Kansas City, VUS/3t',"ion his 're:turn,:V't.Q."it:5qre
country was one of the Truste_e;'-~_,|jle
as President in the year 1989 v'e:*~,!_:§)rog7ressive in
his thought with vision toi' bettefif,'se4i*vivce"ito the Comrnunity,
in particular, and Soic'i'e»t-vi", in he constructed
additional ho.s'tel si::_ti':lti_ci< ijmithe yeiar" at the cost of
Rs.25 Vlialéhs-,1fgyhictii'wasdi-n sii_';ijp'ie4mentatioi1 to the hostel
facility t\x«'tfhl'C.h wasi1i.iis4.¢xi.ste.ris.s. It housed about so students
and f_urthe%*<.. const';iuc't_iso'h."hi at the costs Rs.5O la§<hs was
,,t'n:.'this manner under his Presidentship the Trust
w'£iici'i by'th,ien.s:'was running oniy one hostel also established
lvshyadditionsal hostel block and also started imparting education,
A X1"thVro"u~.gh newly established, its own, education institutions.
' The object was to provide education apart from the hostel
air
faciiity. The contention of petitioners is that the hostei
avaiiabie for students couid not cater to aii the_4..nVee:€i~s_ of
students in pursuit of their education and
educationai institution was be in aidof th'e":naiVn'"obj'eVcii;__of~.
the Trust.
11. The education '--._,u,iWStitiJti.O'f".I Viwestabslishedi
deveioped into first Gracie Coriiietgectotujifiusinestswianagement.
The Courses in Business-.tiff?a9r1va'g:ei'ifie'rit_"jfiihjfimericed in the
year 1996 ai!'i.:':tno«dAe:yr'ri~~.anci'Vj'required faciiities at
the cost .a'ftj'£dVi't:»iAoVr.al Rs.3O iakhs was aiso
§cii'rs-efim Business Management
(MBA) 1999 affiliating the institution
to Mysore 9Unive.rs'i-tyA'abnd"independent PUC Coiiege was aiso
the sa'ih'e-----=year. The study center of the Karnataka
State. 'O'p:Iel;=é'v§.J.::hi'\ferSity was established equipped with library.
'V the activities of the Trust advanced in various
cEi.rectio'n.s with education as its main object, for effectual
"'.rnanAagement of the institution under the banner of the
9' '""originai trust, it was thought fit to have the apprehensive
is
K.'
Ii
terms incorporated in a deed trust for better management
and also to ensure that the lengthy name of th.E"v§:l"L.i>gSt--VVb€
abbreviated to 'TTL Trust'. Such name
keeping in mind that 'TTL' will alsostand $'o'r""'?-o_i;fsra"r'dsTot-tall'r
Learrzing'. Thus, by deed dated. _:"t;:é
trust deed came to be e><ecuted'--;._
13. The respon'd*e_nts_«were-tit!Virecentlvvynoitv interested
in the trust or activities,-1'Abutlobr time filed suit
before the Dj.st':'ig_ct--3u:age_, application under
Section 92i'('V1)T..'of_.'t"l€e Co'dfi'e_of..Procedure to grant leave
to file :a's'ui't-- ceiirftaéni'~re'liefs."_'Thev sought leave to file the
suit on the grounCi.'ti?eVatv«t_h'e..lo-rigizial trust deed was amended
transforming it fro--in"p£li§lic charitable trust to private
and powersAo'f*"the President were enlarged unlike the
'They also alleged that the power conferred
on the P_r.es~i'?de'nt will lead to several adverse consequences
'r__and there:. was possibility of dictatorial management, and will
,,:if"l3e:d'eitrimental to the interest of the trust. in this regard
' thfiev alleged the main object of the trust was to rut: only
hostel and nothing else. According to their apprehension
cl?"
¥.,_
:7. In the first instance, it wouid be necessary to
refer to the question raised by the respondents"aéoiottt
maintainabiiity of the petition under Section
respondents' counsel piacing reliance on e_tt7se de.c'i's«i.on'i*rt' the
case of PANDURANG DHOND1 cHc>uc;t1_tE
MARUTI HARI 3ADHAV AND }ep.or'tett_: iVti=,}i'I"e'V1966"
st: 153, urged that in:"ti,i.§w '.oF'"a'dd'enVdtt:3f§ent'«tdcode of civii
procedure revisionai poia/eir is confined to
consider error {§'LJ€S'EiOfl of fact.
Reference of the Apex Court that
the High records and examine it
to not otherwise, which ground is
opposed
The question about maintainability of revision
i"'p_et"i.t§on"u'i_t.d._e~r:;':3'ection 13.5 of CPC against the grant of ieave
to fife the 'suit has been considered by the Apex Court in its
H recieént d'e(:ision in the case of VIDYODAYA TRUST vs MOHAN
i'r:iRixsAo R. (St orzs. reported in AIR zoos sc 1633, wherein
""Apex Court heid thus:
(9tQ/
4. Earlier the matter was before this Court
Civil Appeal No.3679 of 2006. The factuai po5it:io.n'j:'--.{..t'vi.
as was noticed in the eariier appeai 'V' V
follows:
"Respondents as piairitiiifs filed
2000 before the District Judcje,:'i"Ernal<tila_--rn"tgndert"
Section 34 of the Ir'lC§ii3sfl'V."'i'"..ijLJSt Act, 188:,(sh._js*hert'
the "Trust Act") in respectpf 'ft(j\/C}'d.8",/"E:3V'T"l'LlStI:§ and
administration ofthe sali'dtttéLst and the school run
by the trust. order dated
31.1.2000 heid thattt-he'vQ|1t_w'a's. h'c}~iti,?V--ri'iaihtaihaeie
and ci;.si~;:tss.sd theipetition?'.j_'~ifh_e_rfearter, the suit
No.§.2'O"o_f ~fi_led' the respondents as
plainttVitt:s'Vciati:'min'g_ts'e.ve:?aE reliefs. The respondents
wfiied an of 2000) seeking leave
ofttthe Court :"'riis.:_t.i"'tute the suit under Section 92
t " of CPC"; .iVi{XVccord'ing to the appellant without notice
;,j't:o hirn theic"o'nAcei"ned Court granted leave to the
T --._i¥espoh't:ents to institute the suit. The Suit was
t"'v,{iiim__be:;iie'ti as os 20 of .2000. Plaintiffs filed
_.written statement inter~alia taking the stand that
vuS'.i_ji't was actuated by personal motives. The suit
thunder Section 92, CPC is of a speciaf naturSe
which pre~supposes existence of a Pubiic "trust of
reiigious or charitabie character. From the
averments in the plaint and the reliefs sought for
(W
W
it is ciear that the piaintiffs were not suing to
vindicate rights of the pubiic, and it has not ttieenvt,
flied in the representative capacity". The ;:>ia:nt.;'i'~fs,"»__i'~.
four in number are trustees who IHStItLif€§§WbEatVi1._'_:' , A'
the suits against other trustees for pei'sonai.__:reiée€s""
and as individuais and seei<ring_ viridVir:'ati'ofri» 'o'f,4_'
alleged iridividuai rights and not asrepresénta~t§vesi.___'VQ,g f
of the pubiic. Therefore, the su..it"a_s i'ram:e'dA':"s*
maintainabie under
defendants fiied an appiioat-!.o_n--.pefore District
Sudge, Ei'i1akUia"iifi'."fOi' a_s,.pi"e.iiminary issue,
the question of maitri_tairia.i:E5iiity _orr:tvi1e"s.uit. On the
basis of r_:'ontenti,o'ns"raisedby pia;-'iiitiffs as weii
as the icxouirt'hand-ed».ofeiiminarv sssue
as :;a the.js_uVi't framed is maintainabie
_..und_ei=..,_se&ti:;:pn_ Order dated 1104-
2O€).3AAVii.;vheV_V:=Cou,rt~.___ head that the suit was
Armaintainabiepg ~
g Questioning iiiiorrectness of the order, a
,_.,pet,ition i°"oi"vi..sfei.«'ision in terms of Section 115, CPC
_ wa--s4v.'i.i,|ed. The High Court dismissed the Civii
it V.V'Re§risAito,n~~petition on the ground that the same was
_not'I._m¥aintainabie. Though the High Court made
"'v.rei"e.rence to some factuai aspects, it uitamateiy
eame to hoid that the revision petition was not
maintainable as order dated {)4--11~2003 was an
interiocutory one. Thereafter the appeiiaht flied
writ petition before the High Court praying, inter
aiia, for writ, direction or order, questioning the
30»
' ¥"t;\...
Til
order dated 20tl3. Ev order dated 20~D8~2004 the
High Court dismissed the writ petition holding that-=._
the view taken in the Civil Revision apparently
not correct, as bv no stretch of imagination.~it._¢an'_"7';
be held that the High Court had no }urisdic.tion_uult"-2
accented the stand of the respotndents.'herein that '--
since there was discussion on met-i'ts,'%thQ'ug.h't_heV"'
petition was not held to.' be" main_tai.nablell_l:"'F:TA
subsequent pi*oceeding'sV_initiated'-under i1.ift'i'c.,!ge_;;{H27
("1'
of he COflStltl_if_lOi'l of '£nd.ia,' 1950" ~(_ln'rsl:1o:'tu the
'Constitution? cannot belihaiV:j'taii":ed."
'5. "Both the'.O¥7fl.€FS, ':Ve.,:_oneVinither' Revision
P€tltlOrl3"al'"i§?l#lI'l'l€ iothesiliin 'tVh'ell'_fwijit i_fi'etition were
challenged .t;".i.f!S:' --.t:_ot;--.r't.:l' vTaiking note of the
facts,=..the:jVaQbea.i_Vt't:vasV"disbbsed of with the
Véfollowing-'t;onclt;si'o.ns:___ .
'Judg_ed Vvinxthe;ai"»ore.said background the view of
'the lexai:ne'd~"sing-le "Judge that the Civil Revision
;was.__not5.""8o.t.hthe orders i.e, one in the revision
_i:>etitio'n_Vand the other in the writ petition were
v._lc'n.al'ieVnge_:d before this court. Taking note of the
tact": The appeal was disposed of with the
tollovving conclusions:
ltludged in the aforesaid background the view of
the learned Single Judge that the Civil Revision
was not maintainable is clearly indefensible.
Learned counsel for the respondent has fairly
W
conceded to this position. If it is held that the
suit in terms of Section 92 CPC is not
maintainabie, that would have the result of final. it
disposal of the suit. However, the learhe_di,t'*.."~..
counsel made an attempt to iustifv the order'*
stating that the matter was also dealt'with:fon"~.i
merits. That would not improve the 'SitLic'Jtl{_3.ii,' V
i"he Civil Revision was cleaiily7__Arn'aintlain'abl'e.«V-7-
Therefore, we allow the appeal sorfar" as iti.re'i'at.e's
to Civii. Revision Petition l\i{Z3c.:ii26O/2003 ldisvposed
of by judginenttlaoted Ei='OZE.¥g2OO4gA by th*e._Higg3h
Court. The said ordei' is set :asicie.\ _
The High 'Co-,i_i*t stia'll"'i'iovii hag-5..r the Cflvll' Revision
oh iiri'er;i_5T,_..a7hd' «.:_di_sp.ose". ijof same as
e§<oped'iiti.o'usivn as pr'efe'l'ably within four
ivtrionths.iv5froin§_Vt'i1e:"date ol'_Wreceipt of our order.
:The" fixed considering the
pendeiiicy of the mlattler for a considerable length
-or time.._ =
of themorder passed in the appeal relating
115, CPC no order is necessary to be
pas'JsedA'.:=Vih respect of the judgment in the writ
aL5etitii'on. It may be noted that the learned Single
".J__AIiidge observed that the Civil Revision was
maintainable and, therefore, declined to entertain
the writ petition. This order was passed on the
face of the order passed by learned Single Judge
holding that it was not maintairiable. The same,
9'
gfiw
3.3,,
therefore, is not justifiable. But it is not
necessary to deai with that matter as the Civil
Revision shaii be heard Cm merit/'
19. Therefore, in view of clarity in the"'d._i:Ctva§'i*nh'ot
Apex Court (supra) that against o[rdAer"g«rai-igting.:ieave'ondt.eir
Section 92 of C?C, Revision Petitioi€.__urieV_Aer Segtion
is nsaintainabie, objection are"e\i'er H led,
...,_.y . .,,u _Il\,.(!
20. I shalt now-..if'o_ns--it%eej_rvyhtitiregfvigroguiicls against the
irflilugned order... V
to thefiatl-egatio~:3's_»:'i'n_'the"---..p'ia~'int against the Trustees in
managementii anti pointed out that the reiiefs
SOi.1g_t'fi1.t.ViFi~U'1€fbfifiiof prayer in the suit is not covered by the
.pr'ov¥isiosns.pofA.':~'}e_ction 92 of the CPC.
V".-_r22.'x."_"-Itihsivitherefore, necessary to extract the prayer
.q with4"'v.vh.Vi§:h"'.Vthe respondents have approached the court
viihich reacts as foilows:
For an order for removai of the Board of
Trustees which has come into being in pursuance of
8617/
Relief graatable imcler the provisions of Section
92 of CPC, reads thus:
"92. Wjblic Charitiesw
(1) In the case of any a!leged"'h.rea..ch_..o_f'-any=3
express or constructive trust, ci'eate7d 3i'"or._p'uolic'-.-,,
purposes of a charitable or r'eligi.ous ria't_ure_, or" 9'
whether the direction of, the 'Court isgcieennecj
necessary for the aclrninist_rati_on of any such "t..ru'str,~
the Aclvocatefseneral, orl'i'two or mores-pers;ons
having an interestiri the t,.rt,=stvani:l_y h 'go_bta_ified
the leave of the"'rCour't, may 'institute ausuit,
whether contentiousri or 'riot; principal Civil
Court of original jurisdiction or "any other Court
ernpoweredin tha:t"b"eha'lf l:'>'~,r the State-[Government
within t.hev,lo_'-:al =:l_ii'nitS__.'O?=,vy'tl_OSe jurisciiction the
whole'or_ paitt of the su.bject--rna'tter of the trust
is sit%§zate_"to 'obtai»n"ajdge'Cr_e'e& '
""" re:i%}:ovir'ig» any tr'ustee;
' ' (ti) a';§'p.QVilritinguA__a'new trustee;
(cl) vxestiwrig property in a trustee;
(d)~...direct.ng a trustee who has been
A remov'et§"'or a person who has ceased to be a
.4"Lrustee, to deliver possession of any trust
_ .."property in his possessionyto the person
enti"tled to the possession of such property;
~'(e) declaring what proportion of the trust
property or of the interest therein shall be
allocated to any particular obgect of the
trust;
(f) authorizing the whole or any part of the
trust property to be let, sold, mortgaged or
exchanged;
at"
_Vi'L.evarn_ed Counsel Sri. (3.L. Vishwanath whiie
con'ter1i:;i titat in the piaint there are no ailegations relating to
suitably be made applicable to any other
purpose, regard beihg had to the spirit of the""----g
COlhlfl'OflV"._
trust and its to
purposes; or
applicability
(d) where the original purposes, in vthoieg
in part, were laid down' by refer-er>..c.e__"to ah ._
area which then was, butihassince ceascerj to i '
be, a unit for such purpo}ses; _or 3
(e) where the Ol'lgl?"lal purposes, in wmie or '
in part, have, since _they were laid down=,.¢*~i...
(i) been adeci,u__at'e.lVy provided-.for T?
by otiher rr:eans,"o._r'
(ii) ceased, acs.iVbeihgliiLisel.e'ss or
harmful ..tO_ the com rh'uhity,§_i0'i'
'::::,{"ll.lV> gvjceaised to,' 'be',-.....i*n law,
'~--sh;ari'ta_o.l_e',-pr V
71-{;i_\/V.) ceaS_e'd "ih....ah_y5' other way to
p'rovi_d'e._a suitable and effective
"x"'metho'dg "of using the property
'ayaila«ble~..by:~ virtue of the trust,
re"gar.d'beirig had to the spirit of
V theAtrus.t',"
"'aCi-i;¢.rt'i'h:g.,:toV."_'the averments made in the plaint would
. the folVl'oyving.
Mismanagement or breach of Trust
Any persona! benefit conferred on the Trustees
Any illegality or impropriety in the administration
of the Trust.
§\Q/
- That the Trust property is being endan ered,
alienated or disposed.
The main allegations in the prooosed
certain covenants of the original Trust Deed dated»
have been amended, ihodified_;,o;_ de|_.e't'ed,,::'_~uh'd:er_ the"
Addehda / Corrigehda dated oa~o;a7n19la's;.;
effect of converting the originai Tr'u_st".iVnto a'V_pri'v.aten'fa'i=r3Vi'l'y_
trust; certain convenants re~g_ardiiig."c:o_--«opvtfing':.of'"adjditiori-if
trustees ,1 Ten1oorary__ memb_ers..V_a-n_»d in\/i«-teies have beed
added; that the declaration for :l.".rJus.t_»d'Eited 1o'¥o'd--1993 has
been registered as a Society the Sub~RegiStrar
and therefore that the power
vested in idetiwsiofh is held to be final
and bindin:g--,is'7.aVr'«bitrVary_,--'7T_' ._ °
he Pedtvitlviojhers_'a're'-not -"persons interested" within
the meaigihgi of vSet:{A9"2:_4't-oxhtaintain the suit.
'Vtrreseeet-i4\/eh of the nomehciature used in the addenda
{_§§€i8E)".fandt~d._ec|aration (1993) as a Private Family Trust, the
"fa.ct' the beneficiaries under the Trust \/iz., the
fbulbilfic attartjef and the Uppara Community in Qarticuiar has
not been dirninished, changed or aitered.
A The City improvement Trust Board (CITES) allotted the
'AA'-Zlgtlfsite in 1941 to Sri. Thamrnaiah for construction of the
-rfhiostei. That ailotment: carried a Covenant that the land so
aliotted will be utilized for a Hostel. In fact the old Hostel
gflr
'ii
has been constructed on the site. Additional allotments of
land were made in 3.94344 but such allotments rji'd.gnot
carry-any conditions. Therefore the Trust has no'tiv:viog:i--ated
any conditions of the grant of land. Moreover assiiniV1ri*--g__j'ai~n_v'
such violation, though not admitting
cannot impose such conditions and the rs.ame-;isVv;o!aVtiv~e or
law.
Even under the declaratilgon the
same was in supplement to the oi_'i*gi"r';-a_l Truilstvvibeerl of 3.974
by way of adding further' ogbjecigsih S"?li;gi'al»»legations that the
Hostel activity was disAbavnd.ed'V__Viiv FD*ri."'i§_'amadas under the
Seclaration i§s*§a:lj'se vthie thew Hostel was
constructeddlluiiajririg»the..pe__rio_d 'ofif;9<3_2w94 at a cost of Rs.24
Lacks an-di lAr:iai_igu'ri:ated».jin»._:§;
theTrust:h'a':s.Vbeeir;-,,i'u_.nctioning effectively since 1974
and evenu.__or'iorV' as an implied Trust. Several
additions and i.i__inpi'ovements have been made the Trust
_gu'C'h as college "Building, business inanagernent schooi,
».44V"tZ.!§'Vl"'i.*v(-2'1", library and Karnataka State Open
'Un'i*J'ei'si'tv"tjhasbeen added between 1992 and 2003. There
are" 6@':.s"tu;dents ii': B.Com, 100 Students in 'P.L.l Junior
gAColle.ge_.é:' and more than 250 students ii": BBM, MBA,
CVOi"F_l.[)t£t€F Programs. There are more than 50 teaching and
'"*n'on?«teaching staff. The Established Educational Institution
0%
will suffer serious pregudice if the impugned order is not set
aside.
It is therefore, clear that suit of the nature;'co$.;'e.r_e'dI'
Section 92 CPC will be maintainable, ainy
aileged breach of any express or constructive":4tru_st--.,i:;éated
for public purpose of a charritable V"or_i'eligiou's«na'turi;g,"'~or"~t
whether the direction of the isgdewerneid'inecessary for
the administration of aliegiations in the
plaint and causeaof b'y'*t.her.'jrespondents in the
suit is that public trust into a
famiiyvyvtruvst'w~.ot- tiiingiaiah and on enquiry it
camie 'W document calied Anddenda
and Coirrigendunii:'.yi»*as'~--rjé§istered on 29-O9-1993. Then
any,o_i;h'ei=. docum_ent called Declaration of Trust came into
.A exijstr-'.{nc.e.:on._O6--3..{}--1993, and subsequently Memorandum
" .,oi".._{?iSst;irfj~.gatioitcame to be registered under the name and
style Educational Institute' under the provisions of
" k:arnaVt"ai<a Cowoperative Societies Registration Act.
24. Another ground is that Trust was established
only to run hostel but the petitioners have diversified
(3/QV
activities to start Educational institution, thereby changing
the main object of the Trust. Smt. Geetha Devi,VV.iVea'%*ned
counsel for respondent drawing my attention
in the plaint would contend thatmthe
pleaded clearly before the Trial co.__urt,-th.atus,i.nce'---thezhoste;
constructed on the Eand al!ot.tedV'7b_yd' thec'.»riL:';AT:4B__. is;
ftsnctionat, there is immanent 4th.rea.t of'.CI.fB"rev;oi<1ng the
allotment and resurinéng' 'tthger However the
respondents/plaintiffs ZwevrejfunapEe'2"to""--.p'o'int out to any
5D€CifiC ci..r<;i,i4i"r":1ista_nces _Tvvh1i.ch.v""vvo'uld support and
su bsta h__tpi__ate'~,. 2the:.:_fol it eiglati ns.
l§_'lalai"'ide_
.13. Fa1lur'e_of t--rus~t'ees to fulfil aim and
1 object' 'of,th_e,trust.
respondents/plaintiffs did admit that the
av'erme'nts'.i'made in the piaint are not of such nature as to
.ost;t>sta::itEate mis conduct, mis management or failure to
"~_Vp'erf:orrn the duties caused upon them as trustees. Even
§:e/
against the President of the Trust no such rnaintainahle
ground is urged for grant of relief sought in the DlE3l¥}xtL"..'_r'.'
It is also material to note that during
petition the respondents/plaintiffs'Tiiecl. gag Vse.e'E<invg it
permission to withdraw the suit to
their rights to institute fresh~,s'u.it on of»
action. As only MEMO'~yi/as gflil'ed.':_:anVd-~i.not iaoolicaition as is
required under Provisioénsol' 1 and 2 of the
cec, the mer§no'::fgi'lu'_'ed by Order dated
O9-O3-20079: plaintiffs on their own
volitionhave;iadnhiiifttedf"tot-l'aci{""of'--noaterial / grounds to seek
relief iibder Section32-ol7.CFfC.
i-ioi}?\i~eivV_eH_r_,.in negation of allegations in the plaint
' .oei:gltio:r:.ers._have produced certain documents relating to
the"truvstdfljoirn its ii'iCE*p{l0!'i till now. The only circumtance
alle'gecli.ish,Vxthei"e is deviation from the original object of the
itrtisgt, by starting educational institutions and also that the
hostel which was established is not functional.
dl?"
26. The documents evidence the fact site was
granted to the donor by the CITE, Mysorei It is acgtuaily a
resolution of the CETB and the grant ordei*r'i's's_ued.
pursuance thereto describes theV'§chedu--le"'v-arid:"'~o:ontain's*~.
condition that the land is given:'».1'free,c}f
Resolution NOR 83 dated 28~C-'S3--'«3v94OV"si.ibject
that if it is used for any '§:,'«.Lll'§3OV§l'é:VV"\'_7v:t'l'l~':,_V'.l'T thahiuilfiojstelfg the lands
with building thereon that basis
the respondentsvabprehenci to be resumed
by the CIT:B.,. aoprehension is
set atJr_e_st their declaration that
even on constructed is being used as
hostel and in dilapidated condition
alt,,eijnatii.ve ac'co.nnrnod'a3tion is also made available in the new
.'l%l'O%$Vt€li~AbU~llvAd"i.llg constructed on adjoining land. This
~statern'en"_t_.__h'a;'s"V"not been controverted by the resoondents
e><\c"eot"---Vstafilng that electricity was cut off, which itself shows
'that there is habitation of the students in the hostel.
27. From the plaint averments it is noticed there is
no allegation that the hostel constructed on the first site is
339
not in existence. Mere dis--connection of electrlcity to the
hostel building does not indicate that the hostel has ce'arsVed
to function. On the other hand the specific
the petitioners is that the hostel constructed--~on. site -« ,
is still in existence but requires'i.sub_stafntial"re'pairs,_
provide alternative accorr='n'1'o_datio'ns_"to thel.__students_";
addltiohal hostel building has tliheretore, there
is absolutely no material..V:.13n thatuvthe hostel
constructed on and land is
diverted for p than' it
I:'t"is" time from the date of
inception time thereafter the site has
been_usedl"':'=.or"the._ other than running the hostel.
'3"«.'"l"hve_:"fa§t.:th.at tru'st~---h-as acquired additional lands subsequent
to Tinltia-vl._all.oltrnent by CITB is not in dispute. It is also not in
dls_p'ute.thVa'jt..by virtue of the express trust created in the
year 1§7;4, the then President has continued the main object
A Aofllt-he trust and the hostel has been in existence and used
iéor the students for more than 60 years.
3*"?
28. Therefore, basis on which the respondents
alleged 'rnis--management of the trust finds no supportfit is
also well clarified that the lands acquired subseq--:--.i.'ent'l'r]'
the trust either by its original donor or thtep'v_'g.i.ic'Cess4or'i~p V'
Office is without any riders and wi_tho.u't__ 'coh;ditiori«
related to its user. The grantristo tru_s't*-for foil-f'.i!lAr;"zent'of'itsr.L
object. There is aiso no dispu4te_V'»ithat h"ai.zi'ng-V'iohtainVed the
lands from CITB the donor c-:_ons-tr"uCVteVvd'--.hostel"Ai3Vuilding and
put it to use as ea hostelstVud:en*tsv"an_tithat became the
implied trust 3--_an(;,.i-wassoi_r"eco§n.ise'd-ti.i:i express trust was
created byVv.irtue}_of the'ye'a 271974.
S'in_ce:V:'V'it:ih.a4s*--hVecome express trust by virtue of
trust deed"datved 20?QlS'~«~...i:'l974 and it is that document which
reéi3'0%':b_dV:en.ts aA'lso.,.__r.e«lrie, we have to examine whether it
other activities than running of hostel. The
object trust is specificaily incorporated and is better
part the express trust.
The object declared is; to retain and
develop, existing properties belonging to the
trust morefully described in the schedule
(W
hereunder and also by collections of donation,
grants, aids and loans and from other source's:"..
and to admit Melusakkare Uppara
students for boarding and lodging__li!:1:.
Hostel or Anathalaya or
be further started and develo;}eid.V_i.n V
to grants scholarships"e;n'dg suc.hi..Aid.s
and deserving Ev-':'£!,l.V(lient"S."'ck'..§hév.,g.ofl1l1%Un.it'£Kgnd
to start andll" flducational
Institutvio_n's.__' welfare
._aVilf«' are not
objects of this
:'1__"ru.s§;~.V_g¢,i2<i_::V'~the"-...__Educatioi1al and Social
Ad1!ence'n*:en't_" Melusakkare Uppara
' 'vComnx1u.,naity"of llionor Bellur A Thammaiah."
~30, '«.._T'i*~__i_ss, it admits of no doubt, that the first step
'wa's't:o.Vpi='ojyiVd=e'Viiostel to the youngsters / students belonging
to "U.p:;)arax Community arid other deserving students, and
ifulrtaherll the object has been eniarged to start educational
"institutions and other social and welfare institutions and to
do all acts which are not inconsistent with main objects of
3&4"
the trust. By this, the express trust has brought within its
ambit all the activities not only to provide educatilorrand
free hostei facility to the students of the Uppara;'_"Corfi'ri?i:u:ri_iVtx,-.A
in particular but also to provide education ..
deserving and to start other socialViinstii-tutfionus," vvii-icl.a»'airei.:r}n:c
inconsistent with the main object,
31. The object Confi'ned~:§to benefit
only Darticular sect, 18 of the
expressed "though 1/3"" of the
seats of hereafter to be started
shali stVi{dVerit's""o'f'other Communities and of
the bavlckhzard could be no better clarity
aboU.t_inten"tiori Qf"v--_tl'lA€_btVl'i§blVSt. The intention is clear from the
terms the deeVd"it--se'lf that mere providing hostel facility to
Uppara Community alone was not'the
object, _buxt'i.V_th::e object was quite broad and the founder had
during his iife time itseif thought of social activities apart
fronj prime object.
$97
32. it is necessary to observe that the main cause of
action pleaded by the respondents was that the ho.ste.i¢'_"i2;_:iit
on the Sand was not in use therefore, the :.tj___Q\u
resumed by the CITE and consequently, trL:-st'vQ'o~;i:id~i:: suffern
According to them it is an act of rn._;s--rr:en1'ad'e.n'ien-t retzuiriingj
removai of the trustees. Su»'ih'«--a ground, in of
factuai position must necessariiydf-avii.--,V_
33. Whiie granting.i.'i'eat,.e" the.A:c'o1;rt was expected to
examine the a.v'e«r;nent§§_ in piAain_jt.Vancij't'o find grounds for
the cause ciféflactE.o"n".'ITO"-ajsciertain"whether the apprehension
in the:'rni'ndr.§ji:i tr{éig'pta'inti*ffs jii's'tir§; any interference of the
K court for the the trust and to supercede the
trustbut that" has e=3_ca~;ied notice of the iearneci District
.....
contention of the respondents that the""orig'i:navE"n'1andate in the trust has been vioiated and the r-Resident has assumed to himsetf dictatoriai power adverse '"to'"t'he interest of the trust, atso is without substance ""because recital of the addenda contains no such ciauses. 3&4 35
35. Para--2 of the addenda makes it clear-pthat 'except the amendment noted below, the the terms and conditions of the original regFe_fe:eVrJ'i"§rest deed will remain as they are'. Ti'hAe"adde.nda amendment oniy to reievant Para totdei.ete th.e_-renames' trustess who are not aiive. Parva*"5{ 'thé VV§i'iF3'é'ndmentV' proposed is to deiete ,the_ words ob-nsultatioriyé with the remaining trustees'. Tihej'addetn3'da»».v'a'iVso proposes to incorporate :r:e:"t_ai'n :con§di.:tion.s°7and aj"EO delete certain conditionsf 4iflthat"'c~ond'i4tji-on remain the appointment ' of nevJ'"t'ruste};"%s 'h_'e'c'orne impossible. With that object "Clause' was.'a~:.:e'red'~-acszordingiy.
38... Of'c._ouVrse,V' in rest of the ciauses the President is giver. vvo-rd, but oniy in the case of difference of opinion.
"TF"h'3e_refVor:e_;v..defn'ocratic rule was ieft untouched in the matter of 3d"eci~:;'ionv except when there is any difference of equal vote thre__President is given the power of decisive vote.
37. The other ground canvassed by the respondents is that the pubiic trust has been transformed into a private 0% "wt trust. On close scrutiny, I do not find any condition in the addenda to show that it has transformed from public to orivate trust, except in Page--7, which reads as fol~l~ow_5:.__'_"".j' "So, the President steps intc'the, shoe"'o'fra.tVi:e"' 4_ V donor Bellur A.Thammaiah:;,: who}h'a»d:'.,.'kef3t.'-..,'M implicit faith in his fdatighter Thimmamma @ Thaya£11--n_{a.,_and."in_ hisf'sori.§_'i:'a--»~... ia-..-.: Sri Y..S,i_ingaiah arid aVccoi~d--af{g's§,a Sri Y.S.Lingaiah has 'i<iI<eate"dHthe'jéorfginal Tfriistfvvas well as the adderida.'andfiforr'lg.enda.VTrust, in the capacity, of both. the au_th«orV«'ofl.."the Trust and als'o4'f'the Ii1aii13'f'i<L1stee, and as Presiideri,t*--"t1h__is t!je__main use of the Me,l.usalgl£a;ro___ _ Community Poor Svtudentsv.'ra.r1_d.Afor,:the poor students of other very 'backyifard_:(:o_rhmzunities as well. So this trus't«--.ix3 El pri.\__/age" fafrnilv Trust.' »nThex'Vu's--e----«'of the word 'private trust' in that 'oaufragraoh:.4"i*s.:Vperhaps with reference to the desire of the owner t_hat'1.V_hi's other family members must continue to take part in the benevolent activities, which he had commenced. '".l'_he'i.'efore, mere user of the word private trust does not by U itseif mean that main object public good has.,,been frustrated or object has been confined only to benefit '(.53. Lingaiah or W his reiatives of reiatives of the founder. Since in its terminology the object is to benefit the poor sta.:de.n4't's_V of Uppara Community students in Qarticular _;.of.M other Community in general the trust remainisty putiiiioy charitabie trust. The contention contrary that by addenda theritrusi: has been :;ov'nuve'rtedT;fromj", public trust to private trust is rni's,C0nVCeiyed..V:i'§'t isgtherefore not worthy of acceptance:=?s_ d'i__sc_o_u.nte.d.,"'«.%y
39. trust by the deed referred by deciaration of trust deieid' and object of the trust has noigbeen' other hand, the name of the trusthas been"a.bt;.rey*,§ate'd to be caiied as 'TTL Trust' and ail othiei c_o.r:d..§tions"wi-th«'regard to its aims and object remain of the deciaratton reads 'the Trust h'e_r9eby_ is an Universal and its Family Tradition for the. cause of public charities'. This confirms the r>:b»j'eA;ct of the donor that the trust must fuifii needs of the '(Community and also for the pubiic charity is reaffirmed. §'37/ 4 i
40. The bye--Iaws framed as part of the deciaration at Para--9{D)(a} also makes it clear that 'Board ofllfrulstees and all members and employees of agree and strive and make all efforts"t"o"' and » _ enhance the ability of the Trtist to goals which is to serve the need}-people',:at,i.ia.rgeL members of the Trost 'frost shall not under in 'Convert, call in, sell, mortgage. or 'of any of the propertieséotfh deviate froth the sole Donor, Sri Yajaman Belluitvn. , ' _41.V'l""Ha'ving--, ath/efted to the pieadings as noticed the .reCoro's'v'---and relevant documents, we have no 'hold that the averments in the plaint are oonlttaryg t'os:'i.tti:e facts ann are aiso in the nature of reckiess allegations.
-':42. In fact, the main aim and object with which
-~-Section 92 CF>C has been incorporation in the Code is to at allow courts intervention only in sufficient grounds for its effective control and management by; issuance of directions and framing of schemes wherever necess'ar--v§_g'V~.__'_' requirement of iaw to seek leave to institute..str_'i_'tr.ag:a:i*nst l trust is intended to prevent I_frivo'%ods",*._ '*oas_ei'e.ssg""Vagnd mischievous litigations againSi:,_the public trrr.5"t.r.v""i'he'".main'; intent and purpose of legislature to r'eo.u"ire leave is to protect and preserve
43. Pu,b.i--i:c generaiiv intended to exist in pegrpet_tiitiy'v"ignle-ss__;"ot_he-rw:«iseVV_specificalIv provided in the in'rp'%i'ed--.or;ge§§:p;fe.ss'~trust: "Thevfifounder / founders of the trust are he / they depart, the rein of administraltioniv VandAr._V"rr1_a'nagement passes on to the su..c_c'esEs_orsVp_ inithe .... ..manner provided in the implied or e><Tp'resse'dj"trus_t. The successors having resumed office lwouliid fulfil aims and objects of the trust. By their relen~tle'ss efforts whenever there is noticeable .dVe'v~elopments and in certain cases, it becomes matter of 'envy, their actions are brought in question by unscrupulous elements pretending to champion the cause of prrblic good 6%"
' ----'i.
which could be a mere pretence to interfere with the management and for their personal gain' Therefore to provide a safeguard against such frivolous litigations actions, the public trust is brought within section 92 of CPC. The legislative intentggtoégjroitgect trusts from litigatioris is engraftedlhiin said mandate of Section 92 that grant ofrlefave b\,(,ii{//V/7:D'ls!'l'lj'.lS!E3 .','r;ire;g condition to maintain the su'it_.cannotV"be't--al<en: as mere formality but reqi;iresf'sierio_us 'co~nside~rations." "Uniess the piaintiffs indicate cleafiy =cir<--;umsIta_i'é'--ces of malm administration;"«d_iv'erti=ngg of t'r'us'tf"igiroifierties for personal benefits: ._ -ti-evastative act against the interest ofthe tt'tslS'f.i)r.« 'exploiting the assets of the trust for the_;p"ersonal"' by the trustees; the machinery of Ziadministiratgionv provided under the implied or express trust interfered with. Even amongst the trustees if there b-.e.di\'/isiorz of opinion the majority decision must not 'eeii_'alloWed to be defeated or ridiculed at the instance of "mi"nofi*ity of trustees unless it is noticed that the majority (ERQV 4-1 decision is detrimental and iikeiy to frustrate the object of the trust and possibie extinction.
Besides locus of the piaintiff mest aiso beffascert'a"iii'.e.d; i' when the trust provides for benefit"t'o-severai_V.categories of if persons apart from particuiar categor-;,A'perggiés.,belo.ing.ing_ to one particular category=.o'f~._,benefi,_cia~arie"s i"rcarmoi be"
considered as repre:sentingl""'al_:i'- lithe oei":--eficiaries or community interest or thief,publit,:'at_:'lta.rge"'and wiii have no iocus.
in thVei..,ca.se,_ofV"Swanfii.:l§a'ran9iaVtmanand Saraswati and Anr.v.3:§ana3.ix*r'i4ipa:§iii,an.o'*A_nr, reported in 1974{2) scc 695, the Apefié Cotirti o,bs'erx'ed«--._t:h'us:
1 , Para "I0. ' A suit under Section 92 is a suit of a s"pec_i_aivnature which presupposes the e'x"istV"e.nce of a Public Trust of a reiigious or _ ch'arita"bie character. Such a suit can proceed oi1.gy'voVn,._th.e ailegation that there was a breach ' of's'u.ch~,t'rust or that the direction of the court is_.ne¢_;essary for the administration of the trust'"ané the plaintiff must pray for one or ~~m'c;_\re of the reiiefs that the mentioned in the section. It is, therefore, ciear that if the ailegation of breach of trust in not substantiated or that the plaintiff has not made out a case for any direction by the court for proper administration of the trust, the very foundation of a suit under the section §~{'w/ would fail; and, even if all the other ingredients of a suit under Section 92 are made out, if it is clear that the piaintiffs are not suing to vindicate the right of the pC€.bVi'iC:'._.
but are seeking a declaration ofj""'th.'e~i.r_ ~ r individual or personal rights or the individtuali or personal rights of any other p__er's.on--._"or¢ persons in whom they are _i_ln.t.e_r_este'd, then that suit wouid be outside the scope'of':Seiction_Si2"
(see htshanmukham Chetty :'\"r...'V.l»'!,G~ovinda"----, Chetty, Tirumaiai Degvasthanafms v. _1Jdi'avar'=.' ' Krishnayya Shanbhaga._.__ Sugra ' Bibi? v.1; vH_azi_.:
Kummu Mia and Mulla.._Vg:"~<:ivil Procedure 'Code Vol. 1, p.43-£30). A suit whose _primarv objecgt or purpose is to remedy.the"infr.ingem'ent of an individuals rightor to_'Vvindiicate'a. private right does not fail u"r*.::'er 'thégs }Se'<:tion;'-_ It is not every suit claiming-th-ev"reiiefs_ spfec_ified in the section that can*beb'rough,t un_der':the section but onl.y«'the.suits wh.ich«,. bvejs.i.desf'ciaiming any of thei--_yrei§ieif_s,.areU.brou.gi:t bywindividuals as repi:esen.ta"t'i1?i.es 'of~.th'e_publ.ic.for vindication of public r.i_g;hVts, andi'*in..decidi;ng whether a suit ,fal--lrs_ w.ithi'i%::A. «Section 9'2~w--the court must go gbeyon'di.f_.thAe7.reiiefs and have regard to the _ public Vitrust '*of"° a 'capacity inn"-»wr;»ichr._t'h--a plaintiffs are suing and to the 'pu'r.bos'e._ "for which the suit was brouglit. This is the reason why trustees of religious nature are "pr.eclud"ed_ from suing under the section to vind.i_cate th"--~-E-r"individual or personal rights.
It is "quite immaterial whether the trustees p,ra\,I_'for declaration of their personal rights or deny personal rights of one or more ' defendants. when the right to the office of a trustee is asserted or denied and relief asked for on that basis, the suit falls outside Section
44. N"
in the instant case, we see from the aims and objects of the trust is public charity, that means, apart from & Sri Swamy Ramadas Meiu Sakkare Uppara \/idya \./ardhaka Trust, Mysore, is hereby set aside. Th€vVf5 l;5_ji:'f.fi§€d by the respondenis stands dismissed.
In these circumstamées, rm Q'r'dVe'r=as iifo {;ofis~ts. V 9