1998 (4) TMI 563 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the proceedings u/s 50A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 would abate for the non-substitution of a deceased applicant.
2. Whether the Charity Commissioner has the power to grant a belated substitution application.
3. Applicability of Civil Procedure Code to proceedings u/s 50A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950.

Summary of Judgment:

Issue 1: Abatement of Proceedings
The Supreme Court examined whether the proceedings u/s 50A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 would abate due to the non-substitution of a deceased applicant. The Court held that the concept of abatement under Section 50A would never arise, especially when the Charity Commissioner has the power to initiate proceedings suo motu. The Court emphasized that the procedural law is subservient to substantive law and should aid justice rather than defeat it. Therefore, non-substitution or delayed substitution of a deceased person would make no difference, and the proceedings cannot culminate or be defeated on the principle of abatement as provided in the Civil Procedure Code.

Issue 2: Power to Grant Belated Substitution
The Court affirmed that the Charity Commissioner has the power to grant a belated substitution application. The Court noted that the Charity Commissioner is empowered to frame, amalgamate, or modify a scheme for the proper management of a public trust. The proceedings initiated in accordance with Section 50A cannot be considered improper or illegal due to delayed substitution. The Charity Commissioner's discretion in allowing the substitution of the deceased applicant's son and the impleadment of another set of two persons was upheld as legal and appropriate.

Issue 3: Applicability of Civil Procedure Code
The Court addressed whether the Civil Procedure Code applies to proceedings u/s 50A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The Court found that Rule 7 of the Bombay Public Trust Rules, 1951, and Section 6 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 1882, do not mandate the application of the Civil Procedure Code to such proceedings. Rule 7 merely deals with the manner of inquiries and does not affect the initiation of proceedings or the powers of the Charity Commissioner. The Court concluded that the argument for applying the Civil Procedure Code to proceedings before the Charity Commissioner is without foundation and thus rejected it.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court held that the proceedings u/s 50A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, would not abate due to non-substitution of a deceased applicant, and the Charity Commissioner has the power to grant belated substitution applications. The Civil Procedure Code does not apply to proceedings u/s 50A. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs on the parties.