L PRASHANTH Vs. SHUSHRUTI EDUCATION TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appeal is by the defendants against the order passed on IA 1 filed under O 39 R 1 & 2, CPC by the plaintiff for an ad-interim temporary injunction against the defendants restraining them from entering upon the suit premises of the plaintiff's Trust, its office and institutions and interfering with the work and activities of the Trust and its offices and institutions pending disposal of the suit. Further, IA 2 was also filed by the defendants seeking permission to withdraw the undertaking dated 5.2.2010 and to recall the order dated 15.3.2010.

(2.) Ia 1 filed by the plaintiff was allowed restraining defendants 1 and 2 and their henchmen, agents and supporters from entering upon the schedule premises of the plaintiffs Trust, its offices and its institutions and interfering with the work and activities of the Trust and its offices and institutions till the disposal of the suit. IA 2 filed by the defendants seeking withdrawal of the undertaking dated 5.2.2010 and to recall the order dated 15.3.2010 was dismissed. Aggrieved by the said order, defendants are before this Court.

(3.) It transpires, one N Srinivasa Murthy claiming to be the Managing Trustee of Shushruti Education Trust, Bangalore filed a suit against the defendants for the relief of permanent injunction restraining them from entering upon the suit schedule premises of the plaintiff's Trust and its other offices and institutions. The Trust is situate in Sy.No.63 and 63/2 in an extent of 3.5 acres bearing No.68, Shushruti Nagar, Andarahalli Main Road, Peenya II Stage, Bangalore. It is stated, the Trust is a registered Public Trust. Upto 2006, there was smooth running of the Trust and its activities. Thereafter, the defendants started interfering in the Trust activities and started making character assassination of the plaintiff and also interfered with the internal management affairs of the Trust and were even extracting money from students at the time of admissions, illegally. It is also stated, though the 1st defendant ceased to be the Secretary of the Trust, he unlawfully continued to interfere with the administrative activities and also used the office of the Secretary without any authority from the Trust, he also used to sign the Trust papers and also collect commission and illegal money from students of MBA, BBM, B.Sc. Nursing, etc. The 2nd defendant is the father of the 1st defendant and brother-in-law of the plaintiff. Taking advantage of the relationship and lenience, the 1st defendant forged signatures of the Managing Trustee and represented to the Public that he himself has been designated as Managing Trustee. It is also stated 1st defendant has taken all the books of the Trust including the minutes of the Board forcibly and also started troubling the employees of the Trust and also interfered with the activities through rowdy elements.