power to restrain the Secretary who is a Trustee from using his powers under the Trust. The said jurisdiction of the court, according to the learned counsel, is not found upon the irremediable consequence which would result from the act complained of, but upon the breach of trust itself. In other words, according to the learned counsel, even dehors the decision taken by the Board of Trustees to remove the Secretary from office, the court is justified in restraining the Secretary from functioning as Secretary of the Trust. The learned counsel also pointed out that even if it is found that there is any irregularity in holding the meeting of the Board of Trustees on 22.10.2015, the same has to be ignored in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case as it is clear from the materials on record that the administration of the Trust by the Secretary who was removed from office was against the interests of the Trust and its beneficiaries. In support of the said contention, the learned counsel relied on the proposition that when substantial Justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial Justice deserves to be heard and the courts may in the larger interests of the
