BHOLANATH SHAW Vs. BADRINATH SHAW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for amendment of the plaint in an Administration Suit. The suit was filed on July 20, 1968, inter alia, for administration of the trust created by Rambharas Shaw and for accounts against the then trustee, Sreemati Dhaneswari Devi, being the mother of the plaintiff; for accounts against the said trustee as also against his three other brothers who were looking after the trust estate for removal of the trustees and for appointment of a new trustee.

(2.) Immediately after the filing of the suit the plaintiff made an application for the appointment of a receiver. An order was made therein that the defendant Dhirendranath was to send the periodical statement of accounts in respect of the collections made and the expenditure incurred by him but no order was made for the appointment of receiver. In May, 1969 Shreemati Dhaneswari, the mother died and the four brothers including the plaintiff became the joint trustees. By an order dated August 26, 1969 her death was recorded and several amendments were allowed. By the said order the plaintiff was also allowed to amend his plaint to claim removal of the three brothers as trustees as also the removal of one Bishnu Kumari Kedar and Papia Jaiswal. Originally the plaintiff asked for accounts from the defendant Dhaneswari Devi as also from the said three brothers but later on by that amendment order such accounts were claimed from the said other two persons also viz., Bishnu Kumari Kedar and Papia Jaiswal.

(3.) Thereafter the plaintiff again made another application for the appointment of a receiver on the ground that proper accounts were not being given and alleged that after the death of Dhaneswari Devi the plaintiff had been wrongfully excluded from the management of the trust estate. It was also alleged that Dhirendra was mismanaging the trust estate. On December 23, 1969 the said application was rejected, inter alia, on the ground that the scope of the charges of mismanagement in the plaint were of limited nature and the same was confined to the period prior to the institution of the suit and further that the contesting defendants viz., the three brothers were not sued as trustees at the time the suit was filed. The plaintiff did not prefer any appeal from the said order but on or about June 29, 1971 made the present application for amendment of the plaint.