Disposed

Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust (Registration No 24/UDAI/2003) v. Shri Ashok Kumar Shah

Rajasthan HC15 Dec 2023CR/225/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment rejects a revision petition against an order rejecting a summary application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC in a public trust dispute. The High Court held that since the jurisdictional objection was not raised below, the lower court had no order on the matter to set aside. The petition is disposed of, leaving the petitioner to raise the issue afresh before the lower court.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 05.09.2023 is not interfered with. The petitioner is at liberty to raise the jurisdictional ground afresh before the Court below.

Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj… — Company and Corporate | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:43881]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 225/2023

¶4

Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust (Registration No 24/udai/2003), Through Chief Managing Trustee And Chairman - Shri Devendra Kumar Chapya S/o Shri Ganesh Lal Aged About 79 Years, Office Dastha Humad Bhawan, 26/1465, Peepali Chowk, Gayariyavas, Udaipur Pin 313001

¶5

Devendra Kumar Chapya S/o Shri Ganesh Lalji, Aged About 75 Years, B/c Humad Jain, Resident Of 14, Dhanmadni, Pratham Manzil, Udiapur (Raj) Pin 313001. (Chief Managing Trustee And Chairman) Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust

¶6

Ganesh Lal Dhannawat S/o Shri Dhuru Lal, Aged About 75 Years, B/c Humad Jain, R/o 213, Santosh Nagar, Gayariyavas, Udaipur (Raj. (Treasurar - Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust)

¶7

Amba Lal S/o Shri Nand Lal, Aged About 78 Years, B/c Humad Jain Resident Of 8, Bajrang Marg, Chandpole, Udaipur (Raj) (Member Trust Board, Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust)

¶8

Takhat Mal Mehta S/o Shri Nathu Lalji Mehta, Aged About 84 Years, B/c Humad Jain, R/o 11, Bhattaji Ki Bari, Udaipur (Raj) Member Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust)

¶9

Sanjay Bobara S/o Shri Karorimalji, Aged About 52 Years, B/c Humad Jain R/o 106, Bhupalpur O Road, Udaipur (Raj)( Member, Trust Board, Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust)

¶10

Kailash Chand Kodiya S/o Shri Kanti Lal, Aged About 53 Years, B/c Humad Jain R/o 198 Q Road, Bhupalpura, Udaipur (Raj) (Member Trust Board, Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust)

¶11

Sunil Kumar Tali S/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal, Aged About 64 Years, B/c Humad Jain, R/o 206, Q Road, Bhupalpura, Udaipur (Raj) (Member- Trust Board Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust)

¶12

Jayanti Lal Dagariya S/o Shri Jawahar Lal, Aged About 69 Years, B/c Humad Jain R/o Pankaj Niwas 1188-A,

(2 of 5)

[2023:RJ-JD:43881]

[CR-225/2023]

Hiranmagri, Sector 11, Udaipur (Raj) (Trust Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust)

¶17

----Petitioners

¶18

Versus

¶19

Shri Ashok Kumar Shah S/o Shri Bhogi Lal, B/c Humad Jain, R/o 143, Behind Jain Mandir, Hiran Magri Sector 11, Udaipur (Raj.) (Vice Chairman, Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust)

¶20

Shri Chandan Lal Chapiya S/o Shri Sakal Chand, R/o 171, Vakil Colony, Hiran Magari, Sector 11, Udaipur (Raj.) (General Secretary, Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust)

¶21

Shri Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Sasmaj, Udaipur Through Chairman - Shri Pawan Kumar Jawariya, Office - Dasha Humad Bhawan, 26/1465, Peepli Chow, Gayariyavas, Udaipur - 313001

¶22

Shri Apawan Kumar Jawariya S/o Shri Dhanj Raj, R/o 67, Anand Nagar, University Road Udaipur (Raj.) (President - Shri Digambar Jai, Dasha Humad Samat, Udaipur And Trustee, Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Charitable Trust)

¶23

Shri Kalyan Mal Mehta S/o Shri Sohan Lal, R/o 53, Anand Nagar, University Road, Udaipur (Raj.) (Sr. Vice President P Shri Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Udaipur And Truste - Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust)

¶24

Shri Ramesh Chandra Vageriya S/o Shri Kesri Mal, R/o 1- 2-3, Sarvarituvilas, Udaipur (Raj.) (General Secretary, Shri Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj, Udaipur And Trustee - Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust)

¶25

Shri Nemi Chand Champawat S/o Shri Kishan Lalji, R/o 73-74, J.p. Nagar, Hiran Magri Sector 8, Udaipur (Raj.)

¶26

Shri Amrit Lal Bohra S/o Shri Veer Chand, R/o 39, Hiran Magri, Section 13, Udaipur (Raj.)

¶27

Shri Palji Kadwawat S/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal, R/o 46-C Sarvarituvilas, Udaipur (Raj.)

¶28

Shri Pawani Kothari S/o Shri Kalu Lal, R/o Ka-26, Basant Vihar, Hiran Magri Sector 5, Udaipur (Raj.)

(3 of 5)

[2023:RJ-JD:43881]

[CR-225/2023]

Shri Anil Mehta S/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal Mehta, R/o 134, Ashok Nagar, Road No. 7, Udaipur (Raj)

¶33

Shri Sunder Lal Taletiya S/o Shri Bhim Rajji, R/o 47, Sarvarituvilas, Udaipur (Raj)

¶34

Shri Ram Chandra Dagariya S/o Shri Nand Lalji, R/o 68/69, Maharana Pratap Colony, Hirna Magri, Sector 13, Udaipur (Raj)

¶35

----Respondents

¶36

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Avin Chhangani

¶37

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

¶38

Order

¶39

15/12/2023

¶40

The present revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 05.09.2023 passed by the Additional Civil Judge No.1 (North), Udaipur in Civil Suit No.67/2016 whereby the application under Order 7 Rule 11, CPC (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the application’) as preferred by the defendants has been rejected.

¶41

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present suit itself is not maintainable in terms of Section 73 of the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1959’).

¶42

As per Section 73 of the Act of 1959, no Civil Court shall have jurisdiction to decide or deal with any question qua which any decision can be taken by an officer or an authority in terms of the said Act.

¶43

Section 38 of the Act of 1959 provides that the Assistant Commissioner, on an application/complaint preferred by any interested person, of the trust property not being properly

[2023:RJ-JD:43881]

[CR-225/2023]

(4 of 5)

managed or administered, would enter into an inquiry and it is only after the decision/satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner regarding the object of the public trust having been failed that the parties would be referred to apply to the Court for directions.

¶48

Therefore, in terms of Sections 38 and 73 of the Act of 1959, the instant suit, without availing the remedy before the Assistant Commissioner, would not be maintainable and the Civil Court would not have the jurisdiction to entertain the present suit.

¶49

In support of his submission learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Revision petition No.66/2013 (Mohan Singh vs. Civil Judge (JD) & Judicial Magistrate, Ringus, District Sikar & Ors.) decided on 02.01.2014 .

¶50

A perusal of the order impugned dated 05.09.2023 and the application shows that the ground of the Court not having the jurisdiction was not even raised before the Court below neither in the application under Order 7 Rule 11, CPC nor during the course of arguments. The said ground has been raised for the first time before this Court only. 4. In the opinion of this Court, the Court, in its limited scope of revisional jurisdiction, is required to test the veracity of the order impugned on the touchstone of the law governing the dispute only. Admittedly, the ground as raised before this Court was not raised before the Court below and hence, the Court below was not even required to go into the same. Consequently, there is no order on the issue as raised now which can be said to be impugned in the present revision petition or which can be set aside or affirmed. Therefore, without going into the question whether the suit in

[2023:RJ-JD:43881]

[CR-225/2023]

(5 of 5)

question is maintainable before a Civil Court in terms of Sections 38 and 73 of the Act of 1959, so far as the order dated 05.09.2023 is concerned, this Court does not find any ground to interfere with the same as the same is totally in consonance with law. Even otherwise, no other ground has been raised before this Court.

¶55

However, as the ground raised by the counsel goes to the root of the jurisdiction of the Court, the petitioner would be at liberty to raise the same before the Court below afresh and the learned Court below would be under an obligation to decide the same totally in accordance with law.

¶56

Consequently, Order dated 05.09.2023 is not interfered with and the present revision petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioners as aforementioned.

¶57

Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶58

(REKHA BORANA),J

¶59

69-KashishS/-

Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust (Registration No 24/UDAI/2003) v. Shri Ashok Kumar Shah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandraveer Digambar Jain Dasha Humad Samaj Charitable Trust (Registration No 24/UDAI/2003) v. Shri Ashok Kumar Shah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kishna Ram @ Kishan Singh Sankhala Vs Ram Dayal Parihar

Lalita Sharma Vs Naveen Sharma

Phool Kanwar Vs Sher Singh

Virma Ram Vs Ajma Ram

Mangi Bai Vs Shriram General Insurance Company Limited

Ghisa Singh Vs Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd.