Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Pir Daval Malik Baba Darga Trust and others, filed First Appeal No. 3180 of 2006 against the judgment and order dated 29/9/2006 passed by the District Judge-1, Raigad-Alibag in Regular Civil Suit No. 1 of 2000. The suit was filed by the public trust seeking a declaration of its ownership of the suit land and a permanent injunction against the respondents. The trial court non-suited the trust on the ground that the suit was bad for want of prior permission of the Charity Commissioner under Section 50 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. The appellants argued that the suit was to enforce civil rights and did not require such permission, as it did not involve allegations of breach of trust or administration of trust property. They relied on the decision in Yamunabai Dhankude v. Raosaheb Mohanlal Chimanlal Maniyar Trust, 2012 (2) Mh.L.J. 55, where it was held that a suit for prohibitory injunction by trustees against a third party does not attract Sections 50 and 51 of the Act. The High Court agreed, holding that the suit was for declaration of ownership and injunction, not for reliefs specified under Section 50(A) read with Section 50, and thus prior permission was not required. The court set aside the impugned judgment and remanded the suit to the District Judge for decision on merits, directing the parties to appear on 11/11/2013.
Headnote
A) Bombay Public Trust Act - Section 50 - Prior Permission of Charity Commissioner - Suit for Declaration of Ownership and Injunction - A suit by a public trust seeking declaration of its ownership of suit land and consequential injunction against a third party is not barred for want of prior permission of the Charity Commissioner under Section 50 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, as such suit is to enforce civil rights and does not involve allegations of breach of trust, negligence, misapplication or misconduct relating to administration of the trust. (Paras 2-5)
B) Bombay Public Trust Act - Section 50 - Scope - Suit for Declaration of Ownership - The requirement of prior permission under Section 50 applies only to suits seeking reliefs specified under Section 50(A) read with Section 50, such as recovery of possession or following trust property, and not to a suit for declaration of ownership and injunction against a third party. (Paras 3-5)
C) Precedent - Yamunabai Dhankude v. Raosaheb Mohanlal Chimanlal Maniyar Trust - 2012 (2) Mh.L.J. 55 - Applicability - The principle that a suit for prohibitory injunction by trustees against a third party does not attract Sections 50 and 51 of the Bombay Public Trust Act applies to a suit for declaration of ownership and injunction, as the question to be decided is not one required to be determined by any authority under the Act. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a suit filed by a public trust for declaration of ownership and permanent injunction against a third party is barred for want of prior permission of the Charity Commissioner under Section 50 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950?
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Impugned judgment and order dated 29/9/2006 set aside. Regular Civil Suit No. 1 of 2000 remanded back to the learned District Judge, Raigad-Alibag for decision on merits. Parties directed to appear before the District Judge on 11/11/2013. Civil Application disposed of accordingly.
Law Points
- Section 50 of Bombay Public Trust Act
- 1950 does not require prior permission of Charity Commissioner for a suit by a public trust seeking declaration of ownership and injunction against a third party
- as such suit is to enforce civil rights and does not involve allegations of breach of trust or administration of trust property
Case Details
2013 LawText (BOM) (08) 115
First Appeal No. 3180 of 2006 with Civil Application No. 1873 of 2013
Mr. Rajesh S. Datar, Advocate for the appellants
Pir Daval Malik Baba Darga Trust & Ors.
Smt. Salma Nasirkhan Adhikari & Anr.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
First appeal against judgment and order of District Judge non-suiting public trust in suit for declaration and permanent injunction
Remedy Sought
Appellants sought setting aside of impugned judgment and remand of suit for decision on merits
Filing Reason
Trial court dismissed suit for want of prior permission of Charity Commissioner under Section 50 of Bombay Public Trust Act
Previous Decisions
District Judge-1, Raigad-Alibag by judgment dated 29/9/2006 in Regular Civil Suit No. 1 of 2000 non-suited the public trust on ground that suit was bad for want of permission of Charity Commissioner under Section 50 of Bombay Public Trust Act
Issues
Whether a suit by a public trust for declaration of ownership and permanent injunction against a third party requires prior permission of the Charity Commissioner under Section 50 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellants argued that the suit was to enforce civil rights and did not require prior permission as it did not involve allegations of breach of trust or administration of trust property; reliefs under Section 50(A) were not prayed for.
Appellants relied on Yamunabai Dhankude v. Raosaheb Mohanlal Chimanlal Maniyar Trust, 2012 (2) Mh.L.J. 55, where it was held that a suit for prohibitory injunction by trustees against a third party does not attract Sections 50 and 51 of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi
A suit by a public trust for declaration of ownership and permanent injunction against a third party is to enforce civil rights and does not require prior permission of the Charity Commissioner under Section 50 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, as it does not involve allegations of breach of trust, negligence, misapplication or misconduct relating to administration of the trust, nor does it seek reliefs specified under Section 50(A).
Judgment Excerpts
This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 29/9/2006 passed by District Judge-1, Raigad – Alibag, in Regular Civil Suit No. 1 of 2000, whereby learned Judge in a suit for declaration and permanent injunction filed by a public trust for declaration of its ownership of the suit land and consequent injunction prayed by the public trust, to decide to non-suit the public trust on the ground that suit is bad for want of permission of the Charity Commissioner, as required u/s 50 of the Bombay Public Trust Act.
The ruling would be attracted in the facts and circumstances of the present case and, therefore, the suit would be required to be decided on merits on all issues raised by the parties and a prior permission of the charity commissioner in the facts and circumstances of the case, was not required as the suit was by public trust for declaration of ownership of the suit land with further declaration that the decree passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Pen, in Regular Civil Suit No. 64 of 1991 was not binding on the rights of the plaintiffs-appellants-public trust.
Procedural History
The public trust filed Regular Civil Suit No. 1 of 2000 before the District Judge-1, Raigad-Alibag seeking declaration of ownership and permanent injunction. The trial court by judgment dated 29/9/2006 non-suited the trust for want of prior permission of Charity Commissioner under Section 50 of Bombay Public Trust Act. The trust appealed to the Bombay High Court by First Appeal No. 3180 of 2006, which was allowed on 8/10/2013, setting aside the trial court's order and remanding the suit for decision on merits.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950: 50, 50(A), 51, 80
