Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

27. The plaint originally filed by the appellants was under Section 92(1)(d), (g), and (h) read with Order 4 Rule 1 of Original Side Rules and under Order VII Rule 1 of C.P.C. Even though suit was filed for declaring that the general power of attorney (dated 6.8.2010) and lease deeds (dated 6.8.2010 and 25.11.2010) are null and void, by perusal of plaint, it is seen that it contains averments as to execution of lease deeds and that 2nd and 3rd appellants have completely ignored the basic principles of collective responsibility in the affairs of the Trust and that they have taken upon themselves the task of administering the Trust property as if it is their own property apparently with the malafide intentions. It is also averred that there is no transparency in the dealings of the Trust and that valuable property has been leased out for a period of 29 years and 11 months and competitive bidding has not been resorted to ensure maximum income for the Trust. Though the plaint contains the essential averments regarding the breach of trust committed by the trustees, the fact remains that there was no prayer originally for accounting, removal of appellants from the trusteeships and to settle a scheme for administration of the Trust. By way of the amendment, the respondents 1 and 2 incorporated those three prayers. Except this, no other changes were made in the plaint.