LexSHAH CHHOTALAL LALLUBHAI AND OTHERS versus CHARITY COMMISSIONER, BOMBAY, AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
SHAH CHHOTALAL LALLUBHAI AND OIBERS
B
c
v.
CHARITY COMMISSIONER, BOMBAY, AND OTHERS
I anuary 22, 1965
[K. SUBBA RAO, ACTING C.J., RAGHUBAR DAYAL, R. S.
BACHAWAT AND V. RAMAsWAMI, JJ.]
Bombay Public Trusts A.ct (29 of 19SO), ss. SS and 56--DiversJon
of accumulatil>n of trust funds-When permitted.
A testator, who professed the Jain religion, gave directions in his
will that certain amounts should be spent annually on religious and ch<dt-
lhlo objects specified by him, and that an annual feast sh<>uld be given
to members of his caste in certain specified villages.
He died in 1916
and by 19S5 there was a large accumulation of unexpended
income
mainly because of discontinuing the feas~ and so, the Charity Commis-
sioner filed an application before the District Judge, under ss. SS(l)(b)
D
and 56 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 for directions for the
utilization of that sum.
The District Judge directed a division of the
amount between an educational institution and a hospital. The appel-
lants, who were of the same caste as the testator and who objected before
the District Judge to the diversion of the sum appealed to the High Court,
but the appeal was dismissed.
In their appeal to the Supreme Court, the appellants challenged the
E
propriety and legality of the directions given by the District Judge and
confirmed by the High Court.
HELD : The directions should be set aside, as the respondent had
llOt made out a case for such diversion of trust funds, and the directions
wÂŤa objectionable on the ground that they did not take into account
the original objects of the trust. [821 H; 822 A]
F
On an application eithar under s. 5S(l){a) or s. 55(1){b) read
with s. 56(2) the Court is bound to give direction in respect of all
public trusts.
Section 56(1) provides that in giving the directions, the
Court ahall, so far as may be expedient, practicable, desirable, necessary
or proper in the public interest, give effect to tho original intention of
the author of the trust or tho object for which the trust was created.
Under tho latter part of s. 56(1), if the Court finds that tho carrying out
of the original intention or object wholly or partially, is neither expedient
G
nor practicable nor desirable nor necessary nor proper In the public in-
terest, the court may direct the property or income of the trust or any
portion thereof to be applied cy pres to any other charitable or rdigiooa
object. One of the objects for which the trust was created in the instant
case, was the annual feast to the members of the testator's
caste.
Looking at the interest of the community, it was certainly expedient,
practicable, desirable and proper to give the feast.
Even if it was not a
religious act, it was a meritorious one prescribed by the scriptures of the
H
Jains. In the wider public interest also it was expedient, practicable,
deoirable and proper to respect the sentiments and interests of that sec-
tion of the Jain public and to give effect to the charity. [818 B-C, D-B, F,
0-H]
812
SUPllEMB COURT llEPOllTS
(1965] 2 S.C:R.
Further, the overriding intention of the founder of the trust wu
A
that the amount set apart by him should be devoted to the objects men-
tioned in the will, so that those objects may be continued and carried
out for ever. In accordance with the intention of the founder the surplus
should be applied, as nearly as possible to the original uses and purposes
of the trust.. The savings shoQld be applied suitably for carrying out
the same objects in future or to increase the amounts spendable for the
surviving objects of the truSt, instead of diverting them for other purposes.
B
[820 C, F, H]
[Suitable directions were given by the Court in lieu of thooe set
aside, for utilising the accumulations].
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 634 of
1964.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated
C
January 25, 1957, of the Bombay High Court in Appeal No. 620
of 1956.
Gumanmal Lodha, J. S. Rastogi and J.B. Dadachanji, for the
appellants.
P. K. Chatterjee, B. R. G. K. Achar for R. H. Dhebar, for
D
respondent No. 1.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
Bachawat. J, One Jbaverchand Dahyabhai Shah died in
1916, leaving a will, dated August 6, 1915. He was a resident
E
of V ejalpore in the suburbs of Broach and a Ladva Shrimali Bania
by caste.
He professed the Jain religion, and believed in the
tenets of the Swetembar MurtExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.