GYAN PRAKASH CHAURASIA Vs. BANS NARAIN RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendant's revision in a suit filed by the plaintiff opposite parties 1 to 5 under S.92 of the Civil P.C., 1908 (for short the Code), against the applicants, the defendants, who were vendees of the trust properties. The relief sought in the suit was that the defendant No. 1 is the Sarbarakar of the temple named Mahavir Ji containing idol of Ram Janki and Laxman and also a Sheo temple. The defendant No. 1 Ram Kar Pandey, opposite party No. 6 was the Sarbarakar that he was mismanaging the property as he was not making arrangement for the worship and prayer in the temple, rather he has transferred a sizeable portion of the property dedicated to the temple to defendants Nos. 2 to 4 the present applicants, and thus he has mismanaged the trust properties. The defendant No. 1, the alleged Sarbarakar did not file any objection in the proceedings under S. 92 of the Code, rather opposite party Nos. 2 to 4, the present applicants contested the application denying that there was no temple either of Mahavir Ji or Ram Janki or Laxman, nor the property was trust property. It was alleged that Ram Kar Pandey, the defendant No. 1 was the owner of the property. The defendants 2 to 4 have purchased the property from defendant No. 1 and the plaintiffs have no right to file the application under S. 92 of the Code. The plaintiffs wanted themselves to purchase the property. The application under S.92 was allowed by the impugned order.

(2.) Sri Sankatha Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the suit or the application under S.92 of the Code must be filed against the trustee and not against defendants Nos. 2 to 4, the present applicants, who were vendees and the plaintiffs must have personal interest in the property and the property must be a trust property.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant I am of the view that the revision is devoid of merits. The suit or application under S.92 of the Code has got a unique characteristic. It pre-supposes the existence of a public trust of a religious or charitable character and the suit can proceed only on the allegation that there is a breach of the trust and a consequential direction from the court has become imminent. The plaintiff has to pray one or more reliefs specified under the section. The suit is filed not in the individual capacity as plaintiff or plaintiffs, but as representatives of the public in general for vindication of public rights. In deciding whether plaintiffs have correctly filed the suit as representatives of the public or as private individuals, apart from looking into the reliefs claimed, the court must consider the capacity in which the plaintiffs are suing and the purpose for which the suit is brought.