Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.34 seconds)Swami Parmatmanand Saraswati & Anr vs Ramji Tripathi & Anr on 21 August, 1974
21. But, as held by the Apex Court in Swami
Parmatmanand Saraswati (supra) and Vidyodaya Trust
(supra), it is not every suit claiming the reliefs specified in
Section 92 of the Code that can be brought under the section but
only the suits which, besides claiming any of such reliefs, are
brought by individuals as representatives of the public for
vindication of public rights. In deciding whether a suit falls within
Section 92 of the Code, the court must go beyond the reliefs and
have regard to the capacity in which the plaintiffs are suing and
to the purpose for which the suit is brought. The court below has
not considered the question in this perspective.
Mahant Pragdasji Guru Bhagwandasji vs Patel Ishwarlalbhai Narsibhai ... on 7 March, 1952
14. A suit under Section 92 of the Code is a suit of a special
nature which presupposes the existence of a public trust of a
religious or charitable character. Such a suit can proceed only on
the allegation that there was a breach of such trust or that the
direction of the Court is necessary for the administration of the
trust and the plaintiff must pray for one or more of the reliefs
that are mentioned in the section. It is only when these
conditions are fulfilled that a suit could be brought in conformity
with the provision of Section 92 of the Code. If the allegation of
breach of trust is not substantiated or that the plaintiff had not
made out a case for any direction by the Court for proper
C.R.P.No.841/2019
11
administration of the trust, the very foundation of a suit under
the section would fail (See Pragdasji Guru v. Ishwarlalbhai :
Sugra Bibi vs Hazi Kummu Mia on 13 December, 1968
18. The three essential conditions to be satisfied to invoke
Section 92 of the Code are : (i) the trust is created for public
purposes of a charitable or religious nature, (ii) there was a
breach of trust or a direction of the Court is necessary in the
administration of such a trust, and (iii) the relief claimed is one
or other of the reliefs enumerated therein. If any of the three
conditions is not satisfied, the suit falls outside the scope of
Section 92 of the Code (See Bishwanath v. Thakur Radha
Ballabhji : AIR 1967 SC 1044, Sugra Bibi v. Hazi Kummu
Mia : AIR 1969 SC 884 and Ashok Kumar Gupta v. M/s.
Sitalaxmi Sahuwala Medical Trust : (2020) 4 SCC 321).
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Charan Singh And Anr vs Darshan Singh And Ors on 17 December, 1974
The maintainability of the suit
under Section 92 of the Code depends upon the allegations in the
plaint and does not fall for decision with reference to the
averments in the written statement (See Charan Singh v.
Darshan Singh : AIR 1975 SC 371).
Vidyodaya Trust vs Mohan Prasad R & Ors on 27 February, 2008
21. But, as held by the Apex Court in Swami
Parmatmanand Saraswati (supra) and Vidyodaya Trust
(supra), it is not every suit claiming the reliefs specified in
Section 92 of the Code that can be brought under the section but
only the suits which, besides claiming any of such reliefs, are
brought by individuals as representatives of the public for
vindication of public rights. In deciding whether a suit falls within
Section 92 of the Code, the court must go beyond the reliefs and
have regard to the capacity in which the plaintiffs are suing and
to the purpose for which the suit is brought. The court below has
not considered the question in this perspective.
1