PATEL CHHOTABHAI Vs. JNAN CHANDRA BASAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against a decree of the High Court of Allahabad dated 12 June 1929 which affirmed a decree of the Additional Subordinate Judge at Banares, dated 30 November 1926. The litigation relates to a dispute between the plaintiffs and the added defendants on the one hand and the first three defendants on the other, with regard to certain property mentioned in the schedule to the plaint. All the parties are followers of the Radha Swami religion and the questions relating to the said property involve the consideration of the doctrines, tenets and principles of that religion, which are of vital importance to them and are of great interest to any student of theology. The suit was brought by the plaintiffs (one of whom, viz., Patel Chota Bhai has died since the initiation of the suit) who alleged that they were followers of the true faith of the said religion against Jnan Chandra Basak, Anand Sarup and the Radha Swami Satsang Sabha, a registered body through its secretary, Mr. Nihal Chand, for a declaratory decree to the following "(1)-(a) That the so-called Radha Swami Trust administering the properties shown in the schedule marked A is not, in law, a legal and valid trust, nor of the kind or nature alleged by the defendants. (b) That the said trust, if any is not a trust created or existing for public purpose of a charitable or religious nature or one to which the provisions of Act 14 of 1920 apply. (c) That defendant 1 or 2 or any followers of defendant 2 represented by defendant 3 individually or collectively possess no interest in the alleged trust or in the properties administered by it or in the affairs of the Satsang and its branches attached to the Radha Swami Central Administrative Council. (2) To grant such further relief as the Court may deem fit and proper."

(2.) These defendants were alleged by the plaintiffs to be dissentients from the true faith, and that defendant 2, Anand Sarup Sahib, had been set up as the "Sant Sat Guru" by these defendants and other persons acting with them. Subsequently, certain other persons were added as defendants to the suit, one of whom, viz., Gurmouj Saran alias Moti Ram, afterwards became a plaintiff and the added defendants are now respondents 4 to 9. One of the added defendants, viz., Sahib Madho Prasad, is alleged by the plaintiffs to be the recognized Sant Sat Guru of the true faith of the said religion. As already stated, the added defendants supported the case of the plaintiffs. The Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit with costs. The plaintiffs appealed to the High Court which, on 12 June 1929, dismissed the appeal with costs, hence this appeal by the plaintiffs to His Majesty in Council.

(3.) The defendant-respondents did not file any case in reply to the plaintiffs' appeal; consequently their Lordships have not had the advantage of hearing any argument on their behalf, but the learned counsel who appeared for the plaintiff-appellants, have drawn their Lordships' attention very carefully and fully to the material documents and evidence in the suit, and to the contentions set up by the defendants in the Courts in India. The suit was instituted in consequence of the following matters. In September 1923, Jnan Chandra Basak, the first defendant presented an application in the Court of the District Judge of Agra against Gurmouj Saran, described as the Trustee and Secretary, Radha Swami Trust, Allahabad and Madhav Prasad Sinha Sahib, described as Trustee of the Radha Swami Trust. The application purported to be made under S. 3, Charitable Religious Trusts Act, 1920, (Act 14 of 1920), which provides as follows: " Save as hereinafter provided in this Act, any person having an interest in any express or constructive trust created or existing for a public purpose of a charitable or religious nature may apply by petition to the Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction any substantial part of the subject matter of the trust is situate to obtain an order embodying all or any of the following directions, namely. (1) directing the trustee to furnish the petitioner through the Court with particulars as to the nature and objects of the trust, and of the value, condition, management and application of the subject-matter of the trust, and of the income belonging thereto, or as to any of these matters; and (2) directing that the accounts of the trust shall be examined and audited: