JAIRAMDAS GURU PALTUDAS Vs. SWAMI SATYARAMDASJI GURU SDHANDASJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FIRST Appeal Nos. 610 and 611 of 1975 arise out of a common judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane in Special Civil Suit No. 52 of 1972. First Appeal No. 7W of 1977 arises out of an order passed by the City Civil Court in Charity Application No. 23 of 1973 under Section 72 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). , As the common question in regard to the title of Mahant to be a trustee of the disputed trust is involved, all these matters are taken together for hearing.

(2.) THE facts leading to First Appeal No. 610 of 1975 may be stated as follows: In the City of Bombay, there is a public charitable trust, known as 'Shree Kabirwadi Mandir Trust', having its registered office at Grant Road, which was registered at P.T.R - No. 1 -2553 (Bombay) on January 5, 1962. One Paitudas Guru Sevadasji was the Mahant of the said Kabir Wadi Mandir. He was administrating the trust and managing the trust properties. Paitudas Guru made an application on June 15, 1961 to the Charity Commissioner, Bombay for registration of the trust. He had given the name of the sole trustee as himself and also disclosed by his application the names of the members of the advisory committee. The plaintiff in Special Civil Suit No. 52 of 1972 is one of the members of that committee mentioned in that application. The members of the advisory committee waived the service of notices by their say and requested the Charity Commissioner to grant necessary certificate. The Chanty Commissioner enquired into the matter in Application No. 13 of 1961 and directed to issue necessary certificate and registered the trust by his order dated January 5, 1962.

(3.) A scheme was framed by his judgment dated November 2, 1966, which is on record at exh. 76. It is disclosed from the sen. A attached to the scheme that there is Kabir Sahib's Gadi Mandir, four Samadhis of past Mahants and a deity of Hanumanji, which are situated in survey No. 69. All other properties are also mentioned about which there is no dispute.