THIRUVALANJULI VAIDYALINGAM PILLAI CHARITIES, REPRESENTED BY ITS TRUSTEES (I) S. NARAYANASWAMI IYER AND ORS. Vs. T.A. THAVASIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision petition, Mr. Raman raises an interesting point in the first instance, whether the Court can, on an application by a descendant of the author of the trust, modify a scheme in a manner not even asked for by him. On a perusal of the records, I am satisfied that the lower Court acted suo motu rather than primarily on the application made by one of the descendants.

(2.) As early as in 1916, a scheme was framed for Thiruvalanjuli Vaidyalingam Pillai's Charities, in a scheme suit filed for the purpose in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Kumbakonam in O.S. Nos. 77 and 78 of 1916. The terms of the Scheme are not in dispute. Inter alia, Clauses 5 and 21 run as follows:

(3.) As I said, Mr. Raman originally raised the contention that the lower Court could not exercise such jurisdiction under Clause 21 when it did not think about amending the scheme by itself. When such an application was made by the petitioner as a descendant, it should have been treated and dealt with as such and the Court ought not to have assumed the residuary powers in it to amend the scheme suo motu on the information so furnished by the petitioner in an application which is not maintainable in law.