Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The properties more particularly described in the schedule hereunder and Worth about Rs. 15,000 originally Were belonging to my adoptive father Arunachala Mudaliar and he on 1st May, 1896, executed a will under Which he set up a charity (endowment) and after his life-time, my natural father, Murugesa Mudaliar and after him his son Rao Sahib CM. Subbaraya Mudaliar have been administering charity properties set out in detail hereunder for about 25 years. Since the aforesaid Subbaraya Mudaliar demised, from his wife Andalammal the charity properties described hereunder were taken charge and with a view to permanently carry out the Dharmas this deed of trust is executed. From out of the income derived from these properties after meeting the tax and repair expenses, not more than Rs. 250 shall be spent every year and Vasantha Ut-chavam of Shri Subrahmanyaswamy Kumarakottam, Kancheepuram. shall be celebrated. From out of the income of these properties, expenses should be made for lighting purposes in the aforesaid temple, carry out the repairs of the choultry set up by aforesaid Arunachala. Mudaliar iin Tiruttani and for upkeep and watch and on every Krithiga day' ten pilgrims should be fed. After meeting these expenses the remaining amount shall be augmented and improved and in this way the administration of the properties shall be carried out. Out of the income derived from these endowed properties the charities set out herein shall be performed and under no circumstances the properties shall be alienated or encumbered and no one shall have any right in this regard. As these charities were established by my forefathers for the purpose of properly carrying out these charities and administer, one member from my family i.e., the eldest living shall be the permanent trustee of this Trust. Further my aunt's son, Valavanur Deivasigamani Mudaliar's son, Sethupathy Mudaliar and Porasai Murugesa Mudaliar, residing in No. 9, Subbaraya Mudali Street, these persons shall be the administrators under the Trust whom I have appointed With their consent. These and I, in all three trustees are bound in duty to carry out the charities properly. Among these two trustees, if at any time, vacancy is caused the remaining trustee or trustees can appoint a person or persons whom they consider fit as trustees. Always the trustees shall not exceed more than three. If at any time two vacancies are caused or if one vacancy is caused and disputes arise between the two remaining trustees, then with the help and in the presence of an elderly Honorary Presidency Magistrate appointment shall be made by casting lot in the name of God. All the business transactions by the Trust Board shall be recorded in he Proceedings Book. Either I, or any of the Trustees shall have no manner of right either to cancel (revoke) or alter the deed of trust.

The deed has referred to Arunachala having set apart properties for the performance of charities under Exhibit A-1 and Murugesa and Subbaraya having administered the trust by performing the charities. Natesa, by this deed provided for the performance of charities mentioned therein from the income of the properties set apart for the trust and mentioned that if there is a surplus from the income after performing the charities, the surplus should be added to the trust and augmented and administered as properties of the trust, apart from appointing himself as a trustee and certain others, he chalked out a line of succession in respect of a permanent trustee by providing that an elder member of his family should be a permanent trustee as the trust was created for the performance of charities by the ancestors. He appointed two persons, namely, one Sethupathi Mudaliar and one Porasai Murugesa Mudaliar as trustees for the purpose of administering the trust along With him. It is the case of the respondents that the two trustees appointed by Natesa were not performing the charities and administering the trust as mentioned in Exhibit A-2. Murugesa Mudaliar,, one of the trustees appointed by Natesa under Exhibit A-2 who was examined as D.W. 3 stated that the trustees mentioned in Exhibit A-2 did not take possession of the properties or perform the charities and they did not agree to be the trustees. The plaintiff Who examined himself as P.W. 1 admitted, in cross-examination that the trustees; mentioned in Exhibit A-2 did not take, possession of the properties.