Section 92 CPC Procedure Not Applicable To Suit Instituted By Public Charitable Trust Against Third Parties: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has held that a Public Charitable Trust is not required to take permission from the jurisdictional district court under Section 92 of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), before filing a suit for permanent injunction against a third party. A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj sitting at Kalaburagi bench dismissed the petition filed by Dr Narasimhalu Nandini...
The Karnataka High Court has held that a Public Charitable Trust is not required to take permission from the jurisdictional district court under Section 92 of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), before filing a suit for permanent injunction against a third party.
A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj sitting at Kalaburagi bench dismissed the petition filed by Dr Narasimhalu Nandini Memorial Education Trust and others, challenging trial court order which rejected their application under Section 92, seeking dismissal of the suit filed by Janatha Trust, a Public Charitable Trust for non-compliance of the mandate under the provision.
The primary contention raised by them was that proceedings initiated by a Public Charitable Trust is akin to a representative suit in terms of Order I Rule 8 of CPC and the trust filing the suit on behalf of its beneficiaries and trustees would have to satisfy the requirement of Section 92 of CPC.
Referring to clause-(h) of the section it was submitted that even as regards the permanent injunction or a bare injunction suit, necessary leave has to be obtained in terms of Section 92(1) of CPC.
It was further argued that since the allegation is that there is an interference with the property of the trust, the same at the most would amount to a public nuisance and in terms of section 92 of CPC without permission being taken from the jurisdictional District Court acting in its capacity as a parens patriae no suit can be instituted by the public charitable trust against anybody.
The bench noted that in terms of Section 92(1) of CPC, it is mandated that if a trust were to file a suit whether contentious or not, leave of the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction or any other Civil Court empowered in that behalf by the State Government within the local limits of which subject matter is situate, would have to be obtained in order to institute the suit.
The provisions also details out the nature of the suit that would come within its purview in Clauses-(a) to (g)— suit relating to removal of a trustee, appointment of new trustee, vesting the property in a trustee, direction to a trustee, accounts and enquiries of the trust, usage of the trust property for a particular purpose, settling the claim, etc.
Clause (h) of the provision is residuary in nature which deals with granting of any such further or other relief as the nature of the case may require. Court said this residuary provision can only relate to the subject matter enumerated in Clauses-(a) to (g). It added that it is only in respect of the subject matter at Clause-(a) to (g), that leave of the Court is required to be obtained and in connection thereto, any such other further reliefs may also be sought for.
Court then held that a suit filed by the trust against a third party, as done in this case, would not come within the purview of Section 92 of CPC. "The said suit having been filed in the normal operation of the trust for the trust to preserve and protect its properties and or claim such other properties and not relating to the management of the trust would be outside the purview of Section 92 of CPC,” it held.
Accordingly it dismissed the petition.
Case Title: Dr. Narasimhalu Nandini & ANR Janatha Trust & Others
Case No: Writ Petition no.203194 of 2022
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 256
Date of Order: 19-06-2023
Appearance: Advocate Shivakumar Kalloor for petitioners.