LexLAXMAN BALWANT BHOPATKAR (SINCE DECEASEAD ) BY ANOTHER TRUSTEE DR.DHANANJAYA RAMACHANDRA GADGIL AND OTHERS versus THE CHARITY COMMISSIONER, BOMBAY
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
2 s.o.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 625 LAXMAN BALWANT BHOPATKAR (Since decea•en ) HY ANOTHER TRUSTEE DR.DHANANJAYA RAMACHANDRA GADGIL AND OTHERS v. THE · CHAlUTY COMMISSIONER, BOMBAY (B. .P. SINHA, C. J., K. SuBBA RAo, N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR, .J. R. MUDHOLKAR and T. L. VENKATARAMA AIYAR,. JJ.) Public Trust-Cltaritable purpose-Educatio" to mak people conscious of political rights-Political purpose- Object of general public utility-Bombay Public Trust. Act, 1960 (Bom. 290/ 1960), 88. 2 (13), 9( 4). Lokamanya Tilak died on August I, 1920, leaving a will. On Augut 16, 1920, his. two sons and the executor appointed by him under the will executed a trust deed in respect of two newspapers "The Kesari" and "The Maharatta", and the property and tl~e machinery pertai- ning thereto. Clause I of the trust deed recited: ' 1Thi.s Trust deed haS. been made as a means to the fulfilment perpetually and uninterruptedly after the death of the late Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak of that very object of his with which he . took all activities alier he took charge of the newspapers-the. Kesari and Maratha such as of spreading political education through the newspapers and thereby making people alive to t],eir political rights and carrying on other multifarious pubJic activities cond- ucive to the national ideal etc." A survey of the public life and activity of Lokmanya Tilak showed that his purpose in taking over and Conducting the newspapers was political, in the sense of seeking to achieve by m;:ans of -rousing the consciousness of the people to their condition, a politoical awarenesa, by which adjustments of a political character would be demanded and enforced by the persons who inbibed those truths or were influenced by such writings. ·The question was whether the aforesaid trust was a public charitable trust within the definition ;,, s. 2 (13) read with s. 9 (4) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, so as to justify an order by the Charity Commissioner requiring the .trustees to have the trust regiltcred. Jii62 1961 Loima11 B.ZU-1 Bhopoa:., B)' D"'-nJ111• Ba•,-°"'1• GMtll v. c•..;u C..111mU· """' B0111b<t7 WI SUPltEM.E COURT REPORTS [1963) Held, (Subba Rao, J., Dia.<enting), that a political pur- pose is not a charitable purpose and does not come within the meaning of the expression ''for the advancement of any other object of general public utility" in s. 9 (4) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The life mission of I.okmanya Tilak which he sought to _achivc and achieved through the two newspapers, and which wa~ set out in the trust deed dated August 16, 1920. as the object for which the trust was founded, was a political purpose and, therefore, the trust was not required to be regis- tered under s. 18 of the Act. Per Subba Rao, J.-The. object of Tilak, after he took over the newspapers, was to work for the regeneration of the country, and he thought that national education through newspapers and writings,.. which would mak~ people alive to their political rights, was the most important item in the up- lift of tl.c country. The trust executed to perpetuate the said object was clearly a trust for general public utility within the meaning of s. 9 (4) of the Act. The expression "object of general public utility" is very comprehensive and it includes every purpose, whether political or otherwise, provided it is an object of general public utility. JJonar In.w Memorial 'rn,,.t v. Commi86ionera of inland Ret'enue, (1933) 17 Tax Ca•. 508, Trualet'1 of the Tribune Pre86, Lohore v Commi•Bion<r of Income Taz, (1939) L. R. 66 I. A. 241, All India 8pintutrs' Aasociuticm v. Oommiesioner of Income Ta:c (1944) L. R. 71 I. A. 159, Re Hopkin.oon: Moyd• Ba"k Ltd. v. Baker, [1949] 1 All E. R. 346, Subltas Chmulro Bose v. Gordfzanda• Patel, I. L. R. [1940] Born. 254, and In re Lo/ctroanya TilakJubilu National Truat Fund /Joml>ay, (1941) t3 Born. L. R. 1027, considered. CIVIL .APPELLATE JurusDICTION : Civil Appea.1 No. 313 of 1958. Appeal from the judgment ani decree dated February 2, 1956, of the Bombay High Court, in Appeal No. 77Ft of 1955 from Original Decree. Veda Vyasa, 8. G. Patwardhan and Ganpat Rai for the appellant.a. H. N. Sanyal, Additional Solicitor-General of India, N. S. Bindra and R. TI. J)h,e))(J.r, for the res- pondent 11nd the State of Ma.haraahta (Intervener). ' . , 2 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 627 1962. May I. The foll
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.