KHEMCHAND GORUMAL Vs. PARMANAND DEEPCHAND HINDUJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE is in this city a public trust known as Shrimati Pahunchbai Deepchand Hinduja Trust. It seems it is registered under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, and it is managing two educational institutions in this city.

(2.) IT is admitted that the plaintiff and defendants Nos. 1 to 3 are trustees of this public trust.

(3.) ON March 16, 1959, the plaintiff instituted the present suit. In para. 3 of his plaint he stated that in the meeting of February 17, 1959, no other business was transacted except the question of the termination of services of a teacher by name Bolakani. In para. 4 of the plaint, the plaintiff stated that the alleged appointment of defendant No. 4 as a trustee was without his consent and concurrence, that he vehemently opposed the same and that defendant No. 4 was an improper person for such a post. In para. 5 of his plaint, plaintiff referred to a letter received by him from defendant No. 1, informing him that defendant No. 4 had been authorised to act as the managing trustee and that he had been given full powers to deal with the teachers and the entire administration and that his appointment was proper and legal. In para. 9 of the plaint, the plaintiff claimed the following reliefs:-