K.SADHASIVAM Vs. SHIVAM CHARITABLE TRUST MOOLAKADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision petition has been filed to set aside the fair and decretal order of the Principal District Judge's Court at Salem dtd. 31/8/2017 in IA.No.209 of 2016 in IA.No.139 of 2016 in OS.No.126 of 2016, thereby dismissing the petition seeking to revoke the leave granted under Sec. 92 of CPC.

(2.) The petitioner is the first defendant in the suit filed by the respondents 1 to 5 herein for declaration and other reliefs. In the said suit, the respondents 1 to 5 filed application under Sec. 92 of CPC seeking to grant leave to them to institute the suit and the same was allowed. Thereafter, the petitioner herein filed application to revoke the leave granted under Sec. 92 of CPC and the same was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the present civil revision petition has been filed.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the first respondent is a private trust and other respondents are trustees. The suit under Sec. 92 of CPC presupposes the existence of a public trust of religious or charitable nature. Grant of leave under Sec. 92 of CPC is not automatic but based on the compliance of certain procedures. The respondents 1 to 5 failed to satisfy the mandatory requirements for filing the suit under Sec. 92 of CPC. He further submitted that all the prayers sought for in the suit are in the private interest and not for the public interest since the first plaintiff accepts it is a private trust. All the prayers sought for in the present suit is not for any public interest. Cancellation of supplementary trust deed dtd. 31/12/2014, sought for accounts in respect of the trust and removal of defendants 1 to 6 are only in private interest. Therefore, no public interest is involved in the suit and as such, the suit itself is not maintainable under Sec. 92 of CPC. In fact, in the supplementary trust deed, the second plaintiff is one of the parties and as such he cannot challenge the supplementary deed which was executed by him, that too under Sec. 92 of CPC. In fact, the second plaintiff was the Managing Directory and subsequently in the General Body Meeting, he was expelled from the trust. Therefore, in order to take revenge due to private interest, the present suit has been filed.