Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5. It is necessary to notice the deed of settlement of December 14, 1960 and the relevant portion thereof which governs the rights of the parties herein. Under the said document, Purnanka Mohan Sur, as the settlor, created a trust of which he appointed himself the first trustee. The subject-matter of the trust was the property at 46, Garcha Road with a strip of land that the settlor purchased and amalgamated with premises No. 46, Garcha Road. There is no dispute that the original property and the strip of land subsequently acquired were later renumbered and the entirety of the property covered by the trust is now premises No. 46A, Garcha Road. The material part of the document reads as follows:

" ... AND from and after the death of the Settlor and his said wife Srimati Renu Sur IN TRUST for Srimati Sumana Sur the only daughter now living of the Settlor and his said wife Srimati Renu Sur absolutely and the Trustee shall transfer the Trust Premises to her PROVIDED THAT if any other child or children is or are born to the Settlor through his said wife Srimati Renu Sur and such child or children shall be living on that date then IN TURST for all such children including the said Srimati Sumana Sur absolutely in equal shares as tenants in common and the Trustee shall transfer the Trust Premises to them PROVIDED that if the said Srimati Sumana Sur remaining the only child of the Settlor and his said wife Srimati Renu Sur shall die during the life time of the Settlor or his said wife Srimati Renu Sur then the Trustee shall stand possessed of the Trust Premises in trust for the Settlor's two sons Prosanta Kumar Sur and Susanta Kumar Sur through his first wife Srimati Radharani Sur absolutely in equal shares as tenants in common PROVIDED FURTHER that if the said Srimati Sumana Sur remaining the only child of the Settlor and his said wife Srimati Renu Sur shall survive the Settlor and his said wife but shall die unmarried or if married shall die without any issue then and in that case as well the Trustee shall hold the Trust Premises in trust for the said Prosanta Kumar Sur and Susanta Kumar Sur absolutely in equal shares as tenants in common AND if on the date of the death of the survivor of the Settlor and his said wife Srimati Renu Sur the said Sumana Sur and/or other child or children if any born to the Settlor through his said wife Sm. Renu Sur shall be minor then until the said Srimati Sumana Sur or if there shall be other child or children of the Settlor through his said wife Srimati Renu Sur then until all of them attain majority the Trustee shall act as the guardian of the said minor or minors and shall carry out the trusts herein contained and shall spend the residue of the rents issues and profits of the Trust Premises (after payment of the rates taxes and other outgoings and the expenses of the repair and up-keep of the Trust Premises) towards the maintenance and education of the said Srimati Sumana Sur or other child or children if any of the Settlor through his said wife Sm. Renu Sur as aforesaid and upon the Srimati Sumana Sur attaining majority or if there shall be any other child or children of the Settlor through his said wife Srimati Renu Sur as aforesaid then upon all of them attaining majority the Trustee shall transfer the Trust Premises unto the said Srimati Sumana Sur or to such other child or children, including the said Srimati Sumana Sur as hereinbefore directed PROVIDED ALWAYS AND IT IS HEREBY AGREED AND DECLARED that if the Trust Premises or any part thereof shall be acquired by the Government, Calcutta Municipality or any other public body or Authority under any law for the time being in force then the Trustee shall be quite competent and entitled to receive the compensation money and give full discharge for the same and the same when received shall be invested by the Trustee for the purchase of other suitable immovable property in Calcutta or in its suburbs and until such purchase of immovable property keep the same invested the property so purchased or the compensation money so received until such purchase or the investments thereof shall be subject to the trusts herein contained so far as the same shall be applicable ..."

14. At the time that the relevant deed was executed, the petitioner herein was a child and, though the Hindu Succession Act and the Hindu Marriage Act had already come into effect, conservative Hindu practices had not gone out of vogue. The petitioner herein was then the only child of the settlor through his second marriage, but the document provided that if the settlor were to have any other children with his second wife, the usufructs from the property would accrue to all issues from his second marriage. If, however, the petitioner herein remained the only child of the settlor through his second marriage, and predeceased either parent, the trust property would be for the benefit of the opposite party No.1 and his uterine brother, who were the two issues of the settlor from his first marriage. Since the petitioner herein has outlived her parents, such circumstance is no longer possible. The second situation in which the trust property could have gone to the children of the settlor through his first wife was if the petitioner herein outlived her parents but died unmarried or, if married, died without any issue. The petitioner has outlived her parents. She is married. She has a daughter. It would appear that the second situation envisaged in the deed, upon the happening of which the trust property would vest in the children through the first marriage of the settlor, can no longer arise, but it is here that the opposite party No.1 joins issue.

18. Now to the facts and the interpretation of the contentious part of the document. It is evident from the deed that the trust was to come to an end upon the petitioner herein or, if the settlor had any other children through his second marriage, all such children attaining majority and the trust property being transferred to the petitioner or to all the children of the settlor through his second marriage. Since the petitioner was the only issue of the settlor through his second marriage, the trust ought to have come to an end upon the petitioner attaining majority and the trust property being transferred to her. Even though it is not evident from the plaint as to whether such transfer was effected and no factual input can be borrowed from elsewhere while assessing if the plaint discloses any cause of action, the mandate of the settlor was unequivocal on such aspect and even if the transfer has not been effected it must be deemed to have been effected. Upon the transfer being complete, or deemed to have been effected, the property would vest in the petitioner and it would be for the petitioner to deal with the same in accordance with law or for the usual laws of succession to operate thereon. The rights that the children of the settlor through his first marriage had would stand extinguished upon the transfer been completed or deemed to have been effected.