Case Note & Summary
The case involves a dispute among trustees of an educational trust registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. The appellants, who were trustees, were removed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner under Section 22 of the Act. They challenged this removal before the Joint Charity Commissioner, who upheld the removal. The appellants then filed a suit in the civil court, which was dismissed as not maintainable due to the bar under Section 80 of the Act. The appellate court also dismissed their appeal. The appellants filed a second appeal before the High Court. The High Court framed the issue of whether the Charity Commissioner had jurisdiction under Section 22 to decide the removal dispute. The court analyzed Section 22, which deals with reporting changes in trusteeship, and held that it does not confer power to adjudicate disputes regarding removal. The court noted that the proper remedy for removal of trustees is under Section 41A or by filing a suit. The court also held that the civil court's jurisdiction is not barred under Section 80 for matters not covered by the Act. The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the orders of the lower courts, and remanded the suit for trial on merits.
Headnote
A) Trust Law - Jurisdiction of Charity Commissioner - Section 22 Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 - Dispute regarding removal of trustees - The Charity Commissioner has no jurisdiction to decide disputes relating to removal of trustees under Section 22, which only deals with changes in trusteeship. The proper remedy is under Section 41A or by filing a suit in civil court. Held that the order of removal passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner was without jurisdiction and the civil court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit. (Paras 10-15)
B) Trust Law - Change Report - Section 22 Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 - The provision only requires reporting of changes that have already occurred, not adjudication of disputes. The Charity Commissioner cannot decide contentious issues regarding validity of removal of trustees under the guise of a change report. Held that the dispute was not a 'change' under Section 22. (Paras 12-14)
C) Civil Procedure - Jurisdiction of Civil Court - Section 9 CPC - Bar under Section 80 Bombay Public Trust Act - The civil court's jurisdiction is barred only for matters expressly or impliedly covered by the Act. Since the Act does not provide for adjudication of removal disputes under Section 22, the civil court has jurisdiction. Held that the suit was maintainable. (Paras 16-18)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Charity Commissioner had jurisdiction under Section 22 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 to decide the dispute regarding removal of trustees and whether the civil court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit challenging such removal.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgments of the lower courts, and remanded the suit to the trial court for fresh disposal on merits in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Bombay Public Trust Act
- 1950
- Section 22
- Section 41A
- Section 70
- Section 72
- Section 79
- jurisdiction of Charity Commissioner
- removal of trustees
- change report
- dispute resolution
- civil court jurisdiction
Case Details
2013 LawText (BOM) (08) 19
Second Appeal No. 708 of 2010
Shri V. J. Dixit, Senior Counsel i/by Shri S. V. Natu, Advocate for Appellants; Shri S. B. Talekar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1
Vijaykumar S/o Bhuprao Shete, Sambappa S/o Trimbakappa Girwalkar, Mahadevappa S/o Vaijnathappa Khanapure, Gurlingappa S/o Dhondiappa Menkudale (died), Mahalingappa S/o Baslingappa Sangvikar (died), Madolappa S/o Sidramappa Utage, Shivshankarappa S/o Vaijnathappa Khanapure, Shri Ganpatappa S/o Ramlingappa Choudhari (died), Dr. Sow Sarojini Sambappa Girwalkar, Ratneshwar S/o Trimbakappa Kore
Manohar S/o Keshavrao Patil, Assistant Charity Commissioner, Joint Charity Commissioner, Charity Commissioner
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Second appeal against dismissal of suit challenging removal of trustees by Charity Commissioner under Bombay Public Trust Act.
Remedy Sought
Appellants sought setting aside of orders of removal and declaration that they continue as trustees.
Filing Reason
Appellants were removed as trustees by Assistant Charity Commissioner under Section 22 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, which they challenged as without jurisdiction.
Previous Decisions
The Assistant Charity Commissioner removed the appellants; the Joint Charity Commissioner upheld the removal; the civil court dismissed the suit as not maintainable; the appellate court confirmed the dismissal.
Issues
Whether the Charity Commissioner had jurisdiction under Section 22 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 to decide the dispute regarding removal of trustees.
Whether the civil court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit challenging the removal of trustees.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellants argued that Section 22 only requires reporting of changes and does not confer power to adjudicate disputes; the removal order was without jurisdiction.
Respondent argued that the Charity Commissioner has jurisdiction under Section 22 and the civil court's jurisdiction is barred under Section 80 of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The Charity Commissioner has no jurisdiction under Section 22 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 to decide disputes regarding removal of trustees; such disputes must be resolved under Section 41A or by a civil suit. The civil court's jurisdiction is not barred under Section 80 for matters not covered by the Act.
Judgment Excerpts
Section 22 of the B.P.T. Act only requires reporting of changes that have already occurred and does not confer power to adjudicate disputes regarding removal of trustees.
The civil court's jurisdiction is not barred under Section 80 of the B.P.T. Act for matters not expressly or impliedly covered by the Act.
Procedural History
The Assistant Charity Commissioner passed an order removing the appellants as trustees under Section 22 of the Bombay Public Trust Act. The appellants challenged this before the Joint Charity Commissioner, who upheld the removal. The appellants then filed a civil suit, which was dismissed as not maintainable. The appeal against that dismissal was also dismissed. The appellants then filed the present second appeal before the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950: Section 22, Section 41A, Section 70, Section 72, Section 79, Section 80
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 9
