ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA & ANR. versus M/S SITALAXMI SAHUWALA MEDICAL TRUST AND OTHERS

Citation: [2020] 2 S.C.R. 983 · Decided: 03-03-2020 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: UDAY UMESH LALIT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
983
ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA & ANR.
v.
M/S SITALAXMI SAHUWALA MEDICAL TRUST AND
OTHERS
(Civil Appeal No. 1917 of 2020)
MARCH 03, 2020
[UDAY UMESH LALIT AND VINEET SARAN, JJ.]
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – s.92 – Suit filed by appellants-
plaintiffs (husband and wife) who are Trustees of 1st defendant
Trust, a Public Charitable Trust – Four trustees under the Deed of
Trust are both the plaintiffs and defendant nos.2 & 3 (parents of
1st plaintiff and his brother-4th defendant) – Suit was filed for
framing scheme for administration of the Trust – It was inter alia
pleaded that 1st plaintiff is a qualified surgeon and the 4th
defendant who did not have any medical qualification/expertise to
run the hospital and manage the Trust had been in control of the
Trust and the objects of the Trust were not getting fulfilled; and that
the plaintiffs were sought to be removed from the board of trustees
– Along with the aforesaid Suit, plaintiffs also filed application
seeking leave to institute the suit u/s.92, CPC – Leave granted
u/s.92 – Respondent no.2 sought revocation – Leave granted not
revoked – Respondents filed revision petition – Allowed – Held:
Three conditions are required to be satisfied for invoking s.92 –
Admittedly, the concerned Trust is created for public purposes of
charitable nature – Also, plaint made out a case that the trust was
being run as a private family trust; its object was being ignored;
and that there was necessity to frame a proper scheme for its
administration through competent persons – Further, what was
complained was that the appellants were removed from the board of
trustees and none of the present trustees are from medical profession
– It is in that context that the principal relief prayed was for framing
of a proper scheme of administration and appointing trustees
including the first plaintiff along with other trsutees from medical
profession and from the public – Relief prayed for cannot be said
to be in the nature of vindicating personal rights of the first plaintiff
– Aforesaid relief was prayed so that the Trust which was founded
 [2020] 2 S.C.R. 983
983
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
984
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 2 S.C.R.
with the object of making available medical and related services to
the general public could achieve its objectives through trustees who
are well qualified to undertake such responsibility – If in respect of
a trust which had set up a hospital, a request was made for framing
of a proper scope of administration by appointing trustee from
medical profession and from public for proper administration of
the Trust, the matter would definitely fall within the scope of s.92 –
View taken by High Court is set aside – Decision of District Court
restored.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Three conditions are required to be satisfied in
order to invoke Section 92 of the Code and to maintain an action
under said Section, namely, that the Trust in question is created
for public purposes of a charitable or religious nature; there is a
breach of trust or a direction of Court is necessary in the
administration of such a Trust; and the relief claimed is one or
other of the reliefs as enumerated in said Section. Consequently,
if any of these three conditions is not satisfied, the matter would
be outside the scope of said Section 92. In the instant case, it is
admitted that the concerned Trust is created for public purposes
of charitable nature. The matter on that front is beyond any doubt.
As regards the second condition, paragraph 21 of the plaint makes
out a case that a public charitable trust was being run as a private
family trust; that the object of the Trust was being ignored; and
that there was necessity to frame a proper scheme for
administration of the Trust through competent persons. The
second condition also stands satisfied. Insofar as the third
condition is concerned, the reliefs prayed for are diverse which
include inter alia framing of a proper scheme of administration,
for removing certain trustees and appointment of fresh trustees
from medical profession and from public and for other ancillary
reliefs. [Paras 13, 14][995 E-H; 996 A-D]
1.2 In the present matter, the appellant No.1-first plaintiff,
as a qualified medical professional, was associated with the Trust
and what is being complained is that the appellants have been
removed from the board of trustees and none of the present
trustees are from medical profession. It is in that context that
the principal relief 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.