SHRI D.M. DESHPANDE AND ORS. versus SHRI JANARDHAN KASHINATH KADAM (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.

Citation: [1998] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 669 · Decided: 12-11-1998 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SUJATA V. MANOHAR, AJAY PRAKASH MISRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

SHRI D.M. DESHPANDE AND ORS. 
v. 
SHRI JANARDHAN KASHINA TH KADAM (DEAD) BY 
LRS. AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER 12, 1998 
[MRS. SUJATA V. MANOHAR AND A.P. MISRA, JJ.] 
Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 : Section 50A(4). 
A 
B 
Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958: C 
Section 125. 
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 : Order 6 Rule I 1. 
Public Trust-Scheme for management of-Application filed for D 
execution of scheme by appellant trustees-Possession of Trust land sought 
from respondents-Tenancy claim by respondents-Executing Court rejected 
respondent's application-Consequently, decree executed and Trust had taken 
possession of land-Review filed by respondents rejected by Executing Court-
Appeal preferred by respondents also dismissed by.District Judge-Revision 
preferred by respondents before High Court-High Court directed that issue E 
of tenancy arises and should be referred to Tehsi!dar and Trust should hand 
over possession of land to respondents-Against order of High Court appeal 
preferred before Supreme Court-Held, no particulars have been given by 
respondents relating to tenancy and how it was created-Jn this view of the 
matter the Executing Court rightly rejected the objections of the respondents 
and handed over the possession of the Trust lands to the Trust-The High F 
Court in Revision, in these circumstances ought not to have interfered in the 
absence of any factual basis in support of the plea of tenancy raised by the 
respondents-The impugned order of the High Court, insofar as it directs 
framing of an issue relating to the tenancy of the I st respondent and directs 
..,. 
this issue to be decided by the Tehsildar, is set aside-The direction in the G 
impugned order directing possession of the Trust properties to be handed 
over to the I st respondent is also set aside. 
Ram Sarup Gupta v. Bishun Narain Inter College & Ors., [1987) 2 
SCC 555; Pandu Dhondi Yerudkar v. Ananda Krishan Patil, (1974) 76 BLR 
669 
1-J 
670 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1998) SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A 368 and Mis. Nilesh Construction Company & Anr. v. Mis Gangubai & Ors., 
AIR (1982) Bombay 491, referred to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 4441-4442 
of 1990. 
B 
From the Judgment and Order dated 11.4.90 of the Bombay High Court 
c 
in C.R.A. Nos. 488 and 609of1986. 
Dr. R.B. Masodhkar and K.L. Taneja for the Appellants. 
S.V. Deshpande for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
The appellants I to 3 are the trustees of appellant No.4 which is a public 
Trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The second 
respondent is a former trustee of the said Trust while the first respondent 
D claims to be a tenant of the lands belonging to the said Trust. The land in 
dispute is Survey No. 14 situated at Warud Walidatpur, Yavatmal, which 
belongs to the said Trust. The present proceedings arise from an order in 
Revision passed by the High Court in Execution Proceedings. 
The Deputy Charity Commissioner by his order dated 17th of January 
E 1975, framed and settled a scheme for the management of the said Trust and 
appointed certain trustees. The second respondent, who had throughout 
acted as a trustee of the said Trust, was also appointed as one of the trustees 
under the said order. The scheme was thereafter amended by the Charity 
Commissioner by his order dated 24th of Oct. 1980 in suo motu proceedings. 
F He ordered substitution of certain new trustees by removing earlier trustees. 
The second respondent, by this order was removed as a trustee and he 
was directed to handover possession of the Trust property as well as 
management of the Trust to the trustees appointed under the order of 24th 
of Oct., 1980. Since the second respondent did not handover possession of 
G the properties of the said Trust which consisted of the said land bearing 
Survey No. 14 and also did not handover management of the said trust, the 
trustees moved the Charity Commissioner, Chandrapur. The Assistant Charity 
Commissioner by his order dated 19th of July, 1984 held that the scheme 
which was framed by the order of 17th of January, 1975 and modified by the 
order of 24th of Oct., 1980 was a decree under the provisions of Section 
H 50A(4) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. Therefore, the trustees should 
.-
~
D.M. DESHPANDE v. SHRI JANARDHAN KASHINA TH KA DAM 
671 
ask for execution of the scheme as a decree. 
Accordingly, the present trustees i.e. appellants I to 3, who were the
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.