Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

12. The only point, therefore,t eh remains to be considered is whether the plaintiffs and which of them should be awarded possession of the property. In this connection Mr. Bobde has produced a certified copy of an order of the Deputy Commissioner of Buldana dated 28-2-1955 which according to him shows that during the pendency of this appeal, one Laxmandas Premdas Bairagi of Deulgaon Raja applied to the Deputy Commissioner, Buldana, under the provisions of the M.P. Public Trusts Act No. XXX of 1951 for a declaration that the suit property was a public trust, and by his said order the Deputy Commission, Buldana, ordered the registration of the trust, in terms of the recommendations in the report of the Extra Assistant Commission, Khamgaon, in Revenue Case No. 122/72-D of 1953-54 and it would appear from that report annexed to the order that the trustees of the property are Shri Laxmandas, Premdas, Shri Mukhde Mannudas and Shri Sevadas Narayandas, and Shri Laxmandas Premdas has been mentioned in the report as a working trustee.

Now, Mr. Bobde states that two of trustees Shri Mukhde Mammudas and Shri Sevadas Narayandas are the present appellants Nos. 1 and 2 but the working trustee Laxmandas Premdas is nota party to this suit. Mr. Bobde contends that this order of the Deputy Commissioner would be final and conclusive under Section 7 of the M. P. Public Trusts Act, 1951, subject to the result of any civil suit that may have bene filed against that finding. Mr. Kherdekar has frankly informed me that he has no instructions in this matter.

It is well settled that a Court can take cognizance of events subsequent to the filing of a suit and mould its decree according to the circumstances existing at that time and an appellate Court would have the same power. Hanmant v. Secretary of State, 32 Bom LR 155: (AIR 1930 Bom 254). It would appear that two of the plaintiffs in this suit are now declared to be the trustees of the suit property. If what Mr. Bobde states is correct, then, in my opinion, there should be no impediment in the way of the plaintiffs getting possession of the suit property provided they also bring on record the third trustee Laxmandas Premdas Bairagi who is shown to be the working trustee. The order for possession would have to be in favour of the three trustees.