9911796707
TMI Blog1952 (3) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the year 1928. 2. The case of the plaintiffs, in substance, was that one Kuberdas, who was a religious teacher and a holy man founded a cult known as Kaivalya or Karunasagar Panth, the principal tenet of which is that the realization of the Infinite is possible only through the medium of a Guru or spiritual preceptor. Kuberdas received money and lands from his followers and disciples and with this fund he built a temple at Sarsa. Kuberdas by will appointed his principal disciple Narayandas to succeed him on the Gadi and Narayandas built another and a bigger temple wherein he installed an image of Kuberdas, with the images of two staff bearers on two sides. The Mahants after Narayandas were Baldevdas, Bhagwandas and Pragdsji, who is t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. By his judgment dated the 18th of July, 1935, the District Judge decided both these issues against the plaintiffs and dismissed the suit. Against this decision the plaintiffs took an appeal to the High Court of Bombay. The learned Judges of the High Court, who heard the appeal, took the view that the ownership of the suit properties was so restricted by the obligation to maintain the institution for purposes which only could be described as public charitable purposes, that the suit must be regarded as one coming within section 92, Civil Procedure Code. The result was that the judgment of the trial court was reversed and the case was remanded to that court in order that it might be heard and disposed of on is merits. The judgment of the H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8, by which the High Court reversed the decree of dismissal made by the District Judge and remanded the case, being of opinion that he properties in dispute did appertain to a public trust of a religious and charitable character. 9. Mr. Daphtary appearing in support of the appeal has contended before us that on the question as to whether or not a public trust existed in respect of the properties in suit, the view taken by the trial judge was right and that the decision of the High Court is based upon a misappreciation of the evidence on the record. 10. We have been taken through the entire evidence by the learned counsel on both sides; but having regard to the view which we propose to take in this case we deem it unnecessary to record ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ust was guilty of breach of trust. The defendant denied the existence of the trust and denied further that he was guilty of misconduct or breach of trust. The denial could not certainly oust the jurisdiction of the court, but when the courts found concurrently, on the evidence adduced by the parties, that the allegations of breach of trust were not made out, and as it was not the case of the plaintiffs, that any direction of the court was necessary for proper administration of the trust, the very foundation of a suit under 92, Civil Procedure Code, become wanting and the plaintiffs had absolutely no cause of action for the suit they instituted. In these circumstances, the finding of the High Court about the existence of a public trust was w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
