Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. The Trust Deed contained an Arbitration Clause which reads as under:

All disputes and questions whatsoever which shall arise either during the continuation of this TRUST between the SETTLOR, TRUSTEES and Beneficiaries to the income or to the Corpus of their respective representatives or any of them touching this Deed or the construction or the application thereof or any clause or thing herein contained or any account, calculation or dividend or division of assets or liabilities to be made hereunder, as to any act, deed or omission of any one of the TRUSTEES or as to any other matter in any way relating to the Deed of Trust or any affairs thereof or the rights, duties and liabilities of any person under this Deed shall be referred to a single arbitrator in case the parties agree upon or otherwise to two arbitrators, one to be appointed by each party to the dispute, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Indian Arbitration Act or any statutory modification thereof for the time being in force. In case the two arbitrators so appointed do not agree upon the matter, it shall be referred to an umpire to be appointed by the two arbitrators representing each of the parties to the dispute.

.. 7 .. ARBAP-278/12

8. It is not disputed that none of the parties to this application were signatories of the Trust Deed and the only signatories to the Trust Deed were settler and Trustees. The beneficiaries were not signatories to the Trust Deed. The question arises, can a person reaping benefit under the Trust, becomes bound by the Arbitration Clause given in the Trust and his disputes with the other beneficiaries is to be referred in terms of the Arbitration Clause? There is no doubt that a beneficiary can have benefits of the Trust only in accordance with the terms of the Trust and in the same ratio and proportion which is provided under the Trust. But he is granted benefits by the Trust not out of any contract between him and the Trustees and the Settlor. He is not made beneficiary out of his choice but because of the desire of the Settlor. The Trust is not a contract between settler and the beneficiary. A Trust is a contract between settler and Trustees, where settler places some property in the hands of Trustees and gives power to the Trustees to manage the property in a specified manner and to give benefit of the property to certain persons. A Trust may be a Private Trust or a Public Trust and a similar arbitration clause can be there even in a Public Trust. In Public trust or Trust of religious nature, the beneficiaries would be innumerable persons, who are not even known to the Trustees. I consider that the settler and Trustees together cannot enter into a contract on behalf of the beneficiaries. Any dispute between the beneficiaries can be referred to the arbitration only if there is an independent Arbitration agreement between the beneficiaries for referring the dispute to the arbitration.

10. Perusal of Trust Deed dated 6th April 1983 executed by the Settlor and Trustees indicates that the said Trust was created by the Settlor for the benefit of six beneficiaries who were minor at that time. It is not in dispute that the applicants in the present proceedings and respondent Nos.4 to 6 to 5 to the said Trust Deed were shown as beneficiaries under the said Trust Deed. It is also not in dispute that various benefits were availed of by the beneficiaries under the said Trust Deed and the said deed is acted upon. Under the said trust Deed, the Trustees were empowered to deal with the properties of the trust in a manner set out therein. Perusal of Clause-20, in my view, clearly indicates that if disputes, differences regarding the interpretation of any of the clauses or provisions or the contents of the said Trust Deed or between the Trustees, or the Trustees and beneficiaries, or the beneficiary inter-se regarding the rights, titles or interest flowing or arising from the said Trust Deed or consequential thereto or arising shall be resolved in accordance with the Arbitration Act. In my view, .. 9 .. ARBAP-278/12 there is no substance in the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for respondents that the applicants, being minor at the time of execution of the Trust Deed, were not party to the arbitration agreement. In my view, the minors who were beneficiaries, could not have signed the said Trust Deed, as were not capable of executing the said document on their own. It is, however, clear that Trust was created by the Settlor for their benefit, which contains arbitration clause and which agreement is acted upon by the parties not only when applicants and respondent Nos.4 to 6 wre minor and even after they became major. In my view, the definition of 'party' under Section 2(h) of the Act has to be interpreted harmoniously and the beneficiaries, who were referred in the said Trust Deed as beneficiaries which provides for referring all disputes to arbitration between the beneficiaries and Trustees and also beneficiaries inter-se, has to be construed as if the beneficiaries were also party to the arbitration agreement. It is not in dispute that the beneficiaries who are applicants in the present proceedings and respondent Nos.4 to 6 are now major. In my view, beneficiaries under the said Trust Deed are not only claiming through the Trustees when they were minor, but are claiming independently under the Trust Deed after attaining the age of majority and are thus, entitled to agitate the dispute having arisen between the applicants beneficiaries and the Trustees as well as beneficiaries inter-se by invoking arbitration clause recorded in the Trust Deed.

.. 10 .. ARBAP-278/12

11. In so far, Judgment of Delhi High Court relied upon the learned counsel for respondents is concerned, perusal of arbitration clause set out in paragraph 3 of the said Judgment and Clause-20 of the Trust Deed relied upon in this matter, indicates that these clauses are totally different. In this case, applicants beneficiaries who are entitled to apply for appointment of arbitrator are not disputing the existence of arbitration clause. The issue before the Delhi High Court was whether arbitration clause entered into by the Settlor would be binding on the beneficiaries or not. In this application, as the applicants are not disputing the existence of arbitration agreement and the clause provides for resolution of dispute through arbitrator in case of dispute between beneficiaries and Trustees and beneficiaries inter-se, reliance placed by the respondents on the Judgment of Delhi High Court is of no assistance to the respondents.