Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(19) As regards the case of defendant Nos.1 and 7 to 9 with respect to the suit property being property of the family trust, it is held that the said case was based on the Will which was not proved. It is held that the learned trial Court erred in placing reliance upon the will which was not proved in accordance with law. The learned first

-- 13 -- SA 207.2021 (J) -.odt appellate Court also recorded that the original Will was also not filed on record. The learned first appellate Court also recorded that even if the suit property considered to be property of the family trust, by virtue of the partition decree in the earlier suit, the trust came to be dissolved since some of the properties of the trust were subject matter of the earlier suit for partition and the same were mutually partitioned between the parties which results in dissolution of the trust. Reliance is placed on Section 77(c) of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882 to arrive at such conclusion. The learned first appellate Court has thus held that the suit properties were joint family properties of plaintiffs and defendant Nos.1 to 6 and has allowed the appeal thereby decreeing suit for partition and separate possession.

-- 32 -- SA 207.2021 (J) -.odt AS TO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW C. C. Whether parting of some portion of private Trust property by concerned compromise decree by Wahiwatdar throws property of the Trust as that of a Joint Family property of the family?"

(46) This substantial question of law is framed in view of finding by the learned First Appellate Court that the private trust stood dissolved by virtue of a compromise decree in the earlier suit for partition and separate possession, in which some of the properties of the private trust were subjected to partition between the family members, i.e., plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 to 6. (47) At the outset, it must be stated that the plaintiffs have not come up with a case that the private family trust stood dissolved by implication in view of family partition as recorded in the compromise decree. Implied dissolution of a trust cannot be a pure question of law.

-- 33 -- SA 207.2021 (J) -.odt revocation or dissolution of a trust is obviously a matter of intention of the beneficiaries. Such intention must be exhibited from hard facts, which must to be pleaded and proved. The learned First Appellate Court has erred in drawing an inference with respect to implied dissolution of the trust by act of partition of some of the properties of the trust. Substantial question of law C is answered accordingly.