LAWS(PVC)-1929-3-43

MAHADEO BHARTHI Vs. MAHADEO RAI

Decided On March 06, 1929
MAHADEO BHARTHI Appellant
V/S
MAHADEO RAI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The suit out of which the present appeal has arisen was brought by the plaintiff-appellant Mahadeo Bharthi in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Ghazipur for a declaration that the property specified in list A annexed to the plaint is his private property in absolute ownership, and in the alternative for a declaration that it is not held in trust created for public purposes of a charitable or religious nature governed by Act 14 of 1920. It was necessitated by an order, dated 31 August 1925, passed by the District Judge of Ghazipur under Section 5, Act 14 of 1920(Charitable and Religious Trusts Act) declaring the property in dispute to be held in trust of a charitable and religious nature existing for public purposes. Madho Rai alias Mool Bharthi and Sheo Prasad Pandey, the respondents to this appeal, were impleaded as defendants to the action, as the aforesaid order was obtained by them on their application for examination of accounts of the alleged trust property.

(2.) The defendants put forward two main defences, viz.: (1) that the suit is not maintainable in view of the order of the District Judge, dated the 31 August 1925, already referred to, and (2) that the properties in question are in fact held by the appellant in trust for public, charitable and religious purposes, being dedicated to Math of. Sanyasis at Nasirpur The lower Court ruled that the suit before it was not barred by the order of the District Judge, but held on the merits that the trust set up by the defendants has been established. The plaintiff's suit was accordingly dismissed.

(3.) At the hearing of the appeal the plea in bar of the suit was reiterated by the defendants. This being in the nature of a preliminary objection going to the root of the case should be first examined, and the appeal can be considered on facts if that plea fails. On a careful consideration of the provisions of Act 14 of 1920, I am of opinion that the plea has no force. The object of the Act is: to provide a more effectual control for the administration of charitable and religious trusts.