Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: amendment of trust in Lt. Gen. C.K. Kapur (Retd.) & Ors. vs . Guruji Ka Ashram & Ors. on 31 August, 2018Matching Fragments
(hereinafter referred as "the trust") created by Late Sh. Nirmalji (popularly known as "Guruji" and shall be referred as "settlor" hereinafter), by executing a trust deed dated 14.05.1999 (hereinafter referred as "the trust deed"). Defendant no. 2 is the father of settlor and Defendant no.3 is his nephew.
Admitted Facts of the Case
3. Settlor had appointed himself and his mother, Late Smt. Surjit, as first trustee of the Trust. She expired on 10.05.2001 and to fill up the vacancy, Settlor appointed his father i.e. defendant no.2 as additional trustee vide a Trust (Amendment) Deed dated 11.01.2007. Settlor left for heavenly abode on 31.05.2007. Defendant no.2, the sole surviving trustee, appointed defendant no.3 as co-trustee, with effect from 05.06.2007 by amending the trust deed.
4. The trust deed, Trust (Amendment) Deed dated 11.01.2007 whereby defendant no.2 was appointed as Additional Trustee after demise of First Trustee Smt. Surjit, and the Trust (Amendment) Deed dated 05.06.2007 whereby defendant no.3 was appointed as additional trustee, are admitted by either party and are Ex.P-1 to Ex. P-3 respectively. The amendment deeds refer to the trust deed. The Trust (Amendment) Deed dated 05.06.2007 specifies that appointment of defendant no.3 was being done by defendant no.2 in exercise of Lt. Gen. C.K. Kapur (Retd.) & Ors. Vs. Guruji Ka Ashram & Ors.
26. The trust deed is an admitted document. It is Ex.P-1.
Interpretation of the trust deed is a legal issue. Extrinsic aid in interpreting this document shall be relevant only in case any Lt. Gen. C.K. Kapur (Retd.) & Ors. Vs. Guruji Ka Ashram & Ors.
ambiguity is to be resolved.
27. The issues of fact were age of defendant no.2, and election/nomination of advisory body, because defendants denied these facts. No specific evidence on age of defendant no.2 was however led by either party. The Trust (Amendment) Deed Ex.P-2 was executed on 11.01.2007. Defendant no.2 was appointed as additional trustee vide the said deed by the settlor himself. This suggests that defendant no.2 was below 75 years of age on 11.01.2007. The settlor left for heavenly abode in the same year, just after about four months, on 31.05.2007. On balance of probability thus, it can be safely assumed that defendant no.2 was not 75 years old on the date of demise of the settlor. Questions were put to the witnesses regarding improper running of the trust by defendant no.3. Questions were also put regarding the behavior (like consuming drugs etc.) and qualifications of defendant no.3. Such facts were however never pleaded in the plaint. The pleadings were neither amended during pendency of the suit to include such facts. In such a case, evidence led on these aspects is beyond pleadings and cannot be considered.