BABY Vs. STEWARD CO. LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants filed O. P. 25/1982 before District Court, Trichur for grant of leave under S.92 of the C. P. C. to file a suit relating to a public religious and charitable trust. The court refused to grant leave. Hence the appeal.

(2.) Appellants are members of a religious denomination known as "Brethren Sect". One V. Nagel. a foreign missionary, came to this country during the close of the last century and was carrying on gospel work. He became a follower of the Brethren Assembly and organised units of that Assembly in Trichur, Kunnamkulam and other places Immovable properties were acquired by him. It is alleged in the petition that the properties were acquired by him as a missionary and that they were utilised for the benefit of the Brethren Assembly. Those properties had attained the characteristics of a charitable trust. Nagel left India and the properties were managed by Mrs. Nagel. She transferred "the properties to the 1st respondent who is a limited company incorporated in England. First respondent in turn transferred the properties in favour ' of an association represented by respondents 2 to 4. Portions of the properties are alleged to have been assigned by an agent of 1st respondent in favour of 8th respondent. A big bungalow situated in the property at Trichur is occupied by the 5th respondent on the strength of some entrustment alleged to have been made by respondents 1 to 4. He is also alleged to have been negotiating for sale of portions of the property situated at Trichur. It appears that Mrs. Nagel had executed a sale deed in favour of third parties. It is alleged that the sale deed is void and inoperative. The transfer in favour of respondents 2 to 4 by 1st respondent is also void. Respondents 1 to 4 are not legally constituted trustees. Even if they are trustees, they are guilty of breach of trust. Petitioners therefore sought removal of these respondents from the office of the trustees. In case they are found to be legally constituted trustees, petitioners seek a direction to those respondents ' to render accounts of the profits from the suit properties and also to settle a scheme for proper management. The suits has been filed by two persons representing the Brethren Assembly and the petitioner was filed by them for leave to file the suit.

(3.) A counter statement was filed by 5th respondent for himself and on behalf of respondents 1 to 4. He claimed to be the power-of- attorney holder of respondents 1 to 4. He contended that Stewards Association represented by defendants 2 and 3 is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act and that the properties belonging to the 1st respondent had been transferred to them. The properties possessed by the society cannot be said to be the property of the trust The properties originally belonged to .Nagel, a German citizen. He acquired the properties with his own funds. First respondent was rendering financial assistance to Nagel. Though he came to this country as a missionary of the Basel Mission, he dissociated with that, mission and came into contact with Brethren Groups in Europe and especially the Brethren Groups in Kunnamkulam and Trichur. Nagel had no intention to create a public trust in respect of these properties. After he left India, his wife on the strength of his power-of-attorney transferred the properties in favour of first respondent. The intention of Nagel was chat the properties should be utilised for gospel work. He did not intend that they should be used by the Brethren Group. Members of that group were permitted by Nagel to conduct prayers in the hall in item No. 3 of the plaint schedule.