deceased) and Shri Sushil Singhania (staying abroad). The said application was preferred on 21.6.2006 mentioning the details of the new trustees in pursuance of the meeting held in the month of April 2006. The present appellant submitted objections dated 22.6.2006 and 28.6.2006 that in the absence of the President of the Trust, the said meeting was not as per the by-laws of the Trust. The Registrar has allowed the said objections and rejected the said application vide order dated 8.8.2006. Being aggrieved by the said order, respondent No.2 (Secretary) preferred an application under Section 26 read with Section 27 of the Act, 1951 before the concerned District Judge assailing the legality and validity of the said order. After hearing such application, the case was remitted back vide order dated 6.11.2006 by the District Judge for fresh consideration. Thereafter, the Registrar vide its order dated 24.2.2009 allowed the application of respondent No.2 though it was earlier rejected on 8.8.2006. Hence, the appellant being aggrieved by the said order, preferred an application under Section 26 read with Section 27 of the Act, 1951 before the District Judge, in which, the stay order was granted on 6.3.2009 and finally, the appeal was allowed vide order dated 9.11.2009 and the order passed by the Registrar dated 24.2.2009 was quashed and again, the matter was remitted back for fresh consideration. The Registrar again allowed the application vide order dated 15.11.2010, against which, the appellant preferred an application which is registered as Miscellaneous Civil Appeal under Section 26 read with Section 27 of the Act, 1951 before the Fourth Additional District Judge, Raipur and vide the
