KANTA KOCHHAR Vs. SIR GANGA RAM TRUST SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners herein in this petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India are the tenants/respondents in a proceeding before the Additional Rent Controller from which this petition arises. The petition for eviction was filed by "Sir Ganga Ram Trust Society through Medical Supdt. Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi". The petitioner herein filed an application under Sections 47 & 18 of the Trust Act r/w Section 14(1) of the Rent Act stating that "to the best of the knowledge" of the petitioner herein, there were as many as 13 trustees of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital; that the petition for eviction had not been filed by them and the petition for eviction filed by the Medical Supdt. of the hospital was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed. The respondent hospital filed a reply to the said application generally denying the contents thereof. It was merely reiterated that the Medical Suptd. was authorized by resolution of the respondent hospital to institute the petition for eviction. It was further stated that the said Medical Suptd. was also the Asstt. Secretary and who enjoyed the power to institute suits and eviction proceedings.

(2.) The aforesaid application was disposed of vide order dated 6th July, 2007 of the Rent Controller. The rent Controller proceeding on the premise that the respondent is a trust and relying upon the judgment of Division Bench of this court in Duli Chand v. M/s Mahabir Pershad Trilok Chand Charitable Trust, Delhi, AIR 1984 Delhi 145 : 1984(6) DRJ 153, held that a trust being not a legal entity could not sue and could sue only through all the trustees. An opportunity was given to the respondent hospital to amend the petition for eviction. A perusal of the said order also shows that on the date on which the matter was reserved for orders on the said application, the respondent hospital filed documents before the Rent Controller to show that the respondent hospital was in fact a society, registered under the Societies Registration Act. The Controller held that the said documents having been filed after the orders had been reserved could not be considered and should be kept in abeyance. He also held that even if the said documents were taken into consideration, under Section 6 of the Societies Registration Act also the suit had to be instituted by all the trustees.

(3.) The respondent hospital however, instead of applying for amendment of the petition for eviction to have the petition for eviction instituted by all the trustees, applied for amendment of the petition for eviction to incorporate in column 19 thereof, sub para (ii), to state that the respondent hospital is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act and can sue and can be sued and had vide resolution dated 19th November, 2001 authorized its Asstt. Secretary to institute the legal proceedings.