Case Note & Summary
The plaintiff, Sabita Rajesh Narang, filed a suit against her brother Sandeep Gopal Raheja and other family members and companies, seeking a declaration that the defendants hold certain properties as trustees for her benefit. The plaintiff claimed that her father, Gopal Raheja, had created an oral trust in her favour regarding certain properties, and that the defendants were in breach of trust. The suit also sought an injunction restraining the defendants from alienating the properties. The defendants denied the existence of any trust and contended that the properties were held by them in their own right. The court examined the evidence, including the plaintiff's own testimony and documents, and found that there was no credible evidence to establish an express trust or fiduciary relationship. The court noted that the plaintiff had not produced any written trust deed or contemporaneous documents to support her claim. The court also held that the suit was not maintainable under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as it did not seek removal of trustees or settlement of a scheme. The court dismissed the suit with costs, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove her case.
Headnote
A) Trust Law - Declaration of Trust - Section 88 Indian Trusts Act, 1882 - Plaintiff sought declaration that defendants held properties as trustees for her benefit based on alleged oral trust created by father - Court held that plaintiff failed to prove existence of any express trust or fiduciary relationship - Evidence showed properties were held by defendants in their own right and not as trustees - Suit dismissed (Paras 1-27). B) Civil Procedure - Maintainability of Suit - Section 92 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Suit for declaration of trust without seeking removal of trustee or settlement of scheme - Court held that suit under Section 92 CPC requires allegation of breach of trust and relief for removal of trustee or settlement of scheme - Plaintiff's suit did not satisfy requirements - Not maintainable (Paras 1-27). C) Evidence - Burden of Proof - Oral Trust - Plaintiff alleged oral trust created by father - Court held that burden to prove trust lies on plaintiff - Plaintiff failed to produce any documentary evidence or credible oral evidence to support claim - Mere assertion insufficient (Paras 1-27).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a declaration that the defendants hold certain properties as trustees for her benefit, and whether an oral trust can be established based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Suit dismissed with costs. Notice of Motion disposed of.
Law Points
- Trust
- Declaration of Trust
- Section 88 Indian Trusts Act
- 1882
- Section 92 CPC
- Fiduciary Relationship
- Family Settlement
- Oral Trust
- Specific Performance
- Limitation
