MAHANT PRAGDASJI GURU BHAGW ANDASJI versus PATEL ISHWARLALBHAI NARSIBHAI AND OTHERS

Citation: [1952] 1 S.C.R. 513 · Decided: 07-03-1952 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BIJAN KUMAR MUKHERJEA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

-
S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
513 
MAHANT 
PRAGDASJI GURU BHAGW ANDASJI 
1952 
v. 
M11rcll 7. 
PATEL ISHW ARLALBHAI NARSIBHAI 
AND 
OTHERS 
[SAIYID FAZL Au, MuKHERJEA and V1vIAN BosE JJ]. 
Civil Procedure Code (Act V of 1908) s. 92-Religious trust-
Allegation of breach of trust not made out-Direction for adminis-
tration of trust not sought-Decree declaring existence of public trust 
-Whether legal and proper-Nature of suit under s. 92. 
In a suit under sec. 92 of the Civil Procedure Code alleging 
that the defendant had been guilty of misconduct and 
breach of 
trust as 
Mahant and praying, inter alia, that the temple and pro-
perties in suit be declared as a religious and charitable trust and 
the defendant be removed 
from the Gadi and a suitable succes-
sor appointed in his place, the District Judge and the High Court 
held 
concurrently that the 
defendant was 
not guilty of mis-
conduct or breach of trust and dismissed the suit, but made a 
declaration to the effect 
that the temple and 
properties in the 
possession of defendant belonged to a public trust of a 1eligious 
and charitable character : 
Held, that a suit under sec. 92, Civil Procedure Code, is a 
suit of a special character which presupposes the existence of a 
public trust of a religious or charitable character and it can pro-
ceed only when there is a breach of such trust or directions from 
the Court are necessary for the 
administration thereof and it 
must pray for one 
or other of the reliefs 
that are specifically 
mentioned in the section; and therefore as the 
Courts found 
concurrently that 
the allegations of breach 
of trust 
were not 
made out and no direction of the Court for 
proper administra-
tion of trust 
was sought, the very foundation of a suit 
under 
sec. 92, Civil Procedure Code, became wanting 
and the plaint-
iffs had no cause of action for their suit; and in the circumstances 
the declaration of the 
High 
Court about 
the existence of a 
public trust was inconsequential and was no more than an obiter 
dictum and such declaration must be deleted from the decree 
dismissing the suit. 
CIVIL 
APPELLATE 
JuRisorcrroN : 
Civil Appeal 
No. 99 of 1951. 
Appeal from a Judgment and Decree 
of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Stone C. J. 
and Dixit J.) dated 14th July, 1947, in First Appeal 
No. 128 of 1943 affirming a decree dated 14th October, 
1942, of the Court of the District Judge of Kaira at 
Nadiad in Civil Suit No. 15 of 1928. 
'1952 
· Mahant 
Pragt!asii 
Guru 
Bhagwant!asji 
v. 
Patd 
lshwarlalbhai 
Narsibhai 
and Others. 
Mufther}ea /. 
514 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1952] 
C. 
K. 
Daphtary 
(N. C. Shah, with him) for the 
appellant. 
Rajani Patel for the respondent. 
1952. March 7. 
The judgment of 
the Court was 
delivered by 
MuKHERJEA J.-This appeal is 
on 
behalf 
of 
the 
defendant and it arises out of a suit, under section 92 
of 
the 
Civil 
Procedure 
Code, 
commenced by the 
plaintiffs who were originally nine in number in the 
court of the District Judge of Kaira at Nadiad. 
Out of 
the nine plaintiffs, only one is surviving, and he is now 
the sole respondent in this appeal, all the rest having 
· died pending this 
protected litigation, which began 
as early as the year 1928. 
The case of the 
plaintiffs, in substance, was that 
Qne Kuberdas, who was a religious teacher and a holy 
man founded a cult known as Kaivalya or Karuna-
~agar Panth, the principal tenet of which is that the 
realization of the Infinite is possible only through the 
medium of a Guru or spiritual preceptor. 
Kuberdas 
· received money and lands from his followers and disci-
ples and with this 
fund 
he built a temple at Sarsa. 
Kuberdas by 
will 
appointed his 
principal 
disciple· 
. Narayandas to succeed him on the Gadi and Narayan-
das built another and a 
bigger temple 
wherein he 
installed an image of Kuberpas, 
with the images of 
two staff 
bearers on two sides. 
The 
Mahants after 
Narayandas were 
Baldevdas, 
Bhagwandas and 
Prag-
dasji, who is the defendant in the suit and each one 
of them was appointed 
by 
a will executed by his 
predecessor. 
The defendant, it is 
alleged, had been 
acting in a manner contrary to the usages of the insti-
tution and was 
guilty 
of incontinence, 
mismanage-
ment and improper alienation of trust properties. 
On 
these allegations the plaintiffs prayed that : 
( 1) the properties described in the schedule 
to the 
plaint as well as other 
properties under the manage-
. ment of the

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