NARAINDAS MENGHRAJ NAGAPAL Vs. LALCHAND MENGHRAJ NAGPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under section 34 of the Indian Trusts Act, disputed questions of law and fact, arise and hence is not maintainable by way of the present procedure which is essentially summary in its nature.

(2.) The petitioner and the respondent are trustees in respect of a certain sum of money and the income thereof to be administered in the manner not germane for the purpose of this judgment. The gravamen of the petitioner's charge is that certain shares standing in the joint names of the petitioner and the respondent are wrongfully held solely by the respondent, whereas those shares should be held by them jointly. The respondent concedes that those shares are held by him but contends that this has been so since 1972 when those shares remained in the sole possession of the respondent with the consent of the petitioner and pursuant to an agreement between the petitioner and the respondent whereby the petitioner agreed that physical custody of the shares would remain with the respondent. This agreement is disputed by the petitioner. Thus a disputed question of fact arises which would necessarily entail evidence and cannot be decided by the present summary procedure under section 34 of the Indian Trusts Act.

(3.) It is further the contention of the petitioner that in law the petitioner and the respondent must be in joint possession of the shares. This proposition is also disputed by the respondent. Hence a disputed question of law arises which also cannot be decided by the present summary procedure. Sec. 34 reads as under: