Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.43 seconds)
Documents citing Shrikrishna Annaji Sonatake vs Ramnarayan Pannalal Lathi And Ors. on 6 October, 1981

Sainath Mandir Trust vs Vijaya W/O Vithalrao Mandale And Ors. on 27 March, 2003

11. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has relied on judgment of this Court reported in the case of Shri Krishna Annaji Sonatake v. Ramnarayan Painnalal Lathi and Ors., . In my view the facts of the said case are entirely different and ratio of the said judgment would not be applicable to the present facts. In the said case, a suit was filed impleading the Trust as the first defendant and defendant Nos. 2 to 11. A decree was passed only against the Trust. An appeal was preferred by some of the trustees without impleading the other defendant/co-trustees. In this context, the Court held that the appeal which was filed without adding the other co-defendants as respondents in the appeal, the appeal was not maintainable. The ratio of the said case is not applicable to the facts of the present case.
Bombay High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 3 - V M Kanade - Full Document

Sarda Education Trust, Through Its ... vs Mukund Rambhau Pinjarkar, Prakash ... on 20 December, 2007

In Shrikrishna Annaji Sonatake v. Ramnarayan Pannalal Lathi and Ors. reported at 1983 BCI (O) 27, on which the learned Advocate for respondent No. l Mukund placed reliance, the question was of a trustee being able to maintain an appeal against a decree obtained by a teacher of school which was closed down. In this context the Court held that general principle of law is that the office of trustee is a joint one and, therefore, all the trustees must execute the duties of their office jointly and hence, no suit in regard to trust properties is maintainable by one or some of the trustees, if the remaining trustees are not before the Court either as plaintiffs or as defendants. In respect of landlord-tenant dispute a similar view has been expressed by the Courts.
Bombay High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 3 - R C Chavan - Full Document

Export Credit Guarantee Corporation Of ... vs T.Mathew,The Trustee Of P.T.M. Family ... on 19 September, 2017

4. (2016) 12 SCC 534 Gauri Gaekwad ::: Uploaded on - 27/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/09/2017 00:31:51 ::: 10/15 33.CHS-6-2015.doc cannot survive. Mr. Sancheti also relied upon Duli Chand vs. M/s. Mahabir Pershad Trilok Chand Charitable Trust5 and Shrikrishna Annaji Sonatake vs. Ramnarayan Pannalal Lathi and Ors.6 17 At this stage, we are only considering the application to bring on record the Trustees of the two Trusts. Therefore, the point raised by Mr. Sancheti that the suit has to be dismissed because all the Trustees have not been brought on record will only arise if the chamber summons is not allowed. Since I am inclined to allow the chamber summons, these questions do not arise.
Bombay High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - K R Shriram - Full Document

Export Credit Guarantee Corporation Of ... vs Mrs. Annamma Philip The Trustee Of ... on 19 September, 2017

4. (2016) 12 SCC 534 Gauri Gaekwad ::: Uploaded on - 27/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/09/2017 00:31:50 ::: 10/15 33.CHS-6-2015.doc cannot survive. Mr. Sancheti also relied upon Duli Chand vs. M/s. Mahabir Pershad Trilok Chand Charitable Trust5 and Shrikrishna Annaji Sonatake vs. Ramnarayan Pannalal Lathi and Ors.6 17 At this stage, we are only considering the application to bring on record the Trustees of the two Trusts. Therefore, the point raised by Mr. Sancheti that the suit has to be dismissed because all the Trustees have not been brought on record will only arise if the chamber summons is not allowed. Since I am inclined to allow the chamber summons, these questions do not arise.
Bombay High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 2 - K R Shriram - Full Document

Ramadevi Haribux Garodia And Another vs International Society For Krishna ... on 13 October, 2017

In the case of Shrikrishna Annaji Sonatake (supra), there was a dispute of liability of the trust properties. The issue before the Single Judge was regarding the liability of the properties on the trustee and, therefore, it was held that no suit in regard to trust properties would be maintainable by one or some of the trustees only, if the remaining 14 Of 21 ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2017 02:45:00 ::: trustees are not before the court either as plaintiffs or even as defendants.
Bombay High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - M Bhatkar - Full Document

Shri Cutchi Visa Oswal Derawasi Jain ... vs Shri Cutchi Visha Oswal Derawasi Jain ... on 13 August, 2004

40. At the outset, let me consider various contentions raised by respondent No. 1-Mahajan Trust as regards locus of appellant-Pathshala Trust to filed and maintain suit in question. The suit has been filed by the appellant-Trust register under the Trust Act. The law is well settled that all co-trustees must be joined in filing suit unless the instrument of the Trust otherwise provides. No one single co-trustee even if he be as a managing trustee, unanimously chosen by the co-trustees, can maintain such a suit without other trustees being parties to it. If any one or more are unwilling to be joined the suit as plaintiff or for some reason or the other it is not possible to join them as plaintiff, they must be impleaded as defendants so that all the co-trustees could be before the Court see ; Shaikh Abdul Kayum v. Mulla Alibhai, and Shrikrishna v. Ramnarayan, 1983 Mh.L.J. 248.
Bombay High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 7 - V C Daga - Full Document
1