LexABID HATIM MERCHANT versus JANAB SALEBHAI SAHEB SHAIFUDDIN
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
ABID HATIM MERCHANT
v.
JA.1'/AB SALEBHAI SAHEB SHAIFUDDIN
FEBRUARY 3, 2000
[S.B. MAJlJ.\1CDAR, A.P. MISRA AND UMESH C. BANERJEE, JJ.j
Law of trust,---Cypres doctrine-Scheme of Sir Adamji Peerbhoy
Sanatorium Trust sanctioned by civil coult in 1931-Trustees moving civil
co ult and obtaining change of objects of trust so that hospital facility may not
be restricted to a paiticular community---/n appeal before Supreme Coult,
paities arriving at Agreed Minutes on the basis of which appeal disposed
of-Additional directions issued-Constitution of India, Anicles 136, 142.
A
B
c
The Collector of Bombay on May 8, 1886 as per the reqmest of Sir
Adamji Peerbltoy granted lease of a plot of land at Queens Road, Bombay D
for a period of 99 years commencing from July, 1844 renclTable for a
further period of 99 years. Sir Adamji used the land for the purpose of a
mosque and also constructed a building having three wings for charitable
purposes.
On September 22, 1927, a suit was filed in the High Court at Bombay E
for declardtion that the entire property cannot but be dealt with as a trust
property. The High Court in June, 1931 passed a decree by w·.iy of a
sanctioned scheme and the Trust since then came to be !mown as Sir
Adamji Peerb!ioy Sanatorium Trust ('Trust').
Tne Saifee Hospital Society, later registered as Saifee Hospital
Trust, established to give medical help to the members of the Dawoodi
Bo!ira Community, started running a hospital in wing C. The trustees r.f
the Trust applied to the civil court seeking to amend the objects so that
F
the hospital would not be restricted to a particular community. Cypres G
doctrine for the change of objects was sought and such a change was
granted.
The appellant, aggrieved by the grant of change of objects, appealed
unsuccessfully before a Single Judge and later a Division Bench of the High
Court. He then appealed to this court.
H
607
608
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2000] 1 S.C.R.
A
During the pendency of the a)lpeal in this court, the parties arrived
B
at an amicable solution to the disputes. This was reduced to the Agreed
Minutes on the basis of which the appeal was disposed of by this court.
Disposing of the matter, this court in addition to the agreed minutes
gave, inter alia, the following directives:
(i) The order~ given under the Government Memorandum dated
February 28, 1994 for renewal of lr,ase of the land in favour of the Trust
stands cancellt:d. The policy of th government for renewal of expired
leases is made applicable to the Trnst as a ~)lecial case and the lease shall
C be renewed from July 1, 1983 to December 31, 1998 on concessional ground
rent. The lease of land would be renewed for a further period of thirty years
from 1.1.99 on concessional ground rent. The ground rent would be in-
creased by 10% every ten years. The lessee or sub- lessee would have the
option for further renewals of least~. While renewing the lease of the Trnst
due regard be had to the covenant, provisions and stipulations as are
D available in the lease deed of 1888 excepting, however, the rate of rent llS
mentioned hereinbefore.
(ii) The State Government i:s directed to accord permission to use
the land for Saifee Hospital and also for the Sanatorium in terms of wishes
E and desires of Sir Adamji in the building of the Trnst as well as to
sub-lease the land undrr the said ~uildirg to Saifee Hospital Trust.
F
(iii) 25 beds in the hospital of the Saifee Hospital trust shall be
reserved for government employees.
(iv) The Trust and the Saifee Hospital shall ensure while carrying
out new constructions for the Hospital that no let or hindrance is caused
to the religious place as well as graveyard located there.
Halsbury's Laws of England 4th Ed., Vol. SB.' Ratilal v. State of
Bombay, AIR (1954) SC 388 and NS. Rajabathar Mudaliar v. M.S. Vadivelu
G Mudaliar, [1970) 1 sec 12, referred to.
CIVIL APPELLATE JCRISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 5682 of
1999.
From the Judgment and Order dated 15.7.93 of the Bombay High
H Court in L.P.A. No. 103 of 1991 in F.A. No. 1078 of 1991
ABID HA TIM MERCHA,'llT v. J.S. SAHEB SHA!FIJDDIN [BANERJEE. J.)
609
M.L. Verma, U.R. Lalit, Ashok Desai, Ms. Indira Jai Singh, F.S. A
Nariman, R.F. Nariman, Y.H. Muchala, Anil Diwan, K. Parasaran, Dr.
L.M. Singhvi, Rafiqm: Dada, Parag Tripathi, Mrs. Nilofar Bhagwat, VA
~
Mohta, Chander Cdai Singh, Ms. Rukhsana Choudhary, Ms. S. Janani, S.A.
Poonawala, lrshad Poonawala, Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.