PADMAVATI Vs. NARSILAL P DALAL
LAWS(BOM)-1954-8-10
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on August 11,1954

PADMAVATI Appellant
VERSUS
NARSILAL P.DALAL Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

INCOME-TAX SPECIAL PURPOSES COMMRS. V. PEMSEL [REFERRED TO]
COMPTON,POWELL V. COMPTON [REFERRED TO]
OPPENHEIM V. TOBACCO SECURITIES TRUST CO. LTD. [REFERRED TO]
KOETTGEN'S WILL TRUSTS,WEST MINSTER BANK V. FAMILY WELFARE ASSOCIATION TRUSTEES [REFERRED TO]
D.V.ARUR V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,BOMBAY [REFERRED TO]
RYAN V. FORREST [REFERRED TO]
TRUSTEES OF GORDHANDAS GOVINDRAM FAMILY CHARITY TRUST NAVALGADH VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL BOMBAY [REFERRED TO]





JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THE main question that arises to be answered on this originating Summons is whether the deed of trust dated 26-3-1941 made by one Lallubhai Vrijbhukhandas Khandwalla of certain moveable and immoveable properties at Santa Cruz creates a valid public charitable trust. Thereafter certain ancillary questions also arise to be answered in the light of the answer to be given to the main question stated above. The deed of trust is dated 26-3-1941 under which the settlor appointed himself, one Purshottamdas Harkisandas, defendant 1 and one Jehangir Hormusji Mody as the first trustees. During the life time of the Settlor it is stated that these trustees did not in fact act in any manner under the provisions of the deed of trust. The settlor died in Bombay on-17-4-1946 leaving a son Jayantilal Lallubhai Khandwalla and one grand-son named Ramit and a grand-daughter named Pratibha as his only heirs. Jayantilal died on 5-6-1948 leaving behind him a widow who is the plaintiff, three sons and one daughter namely Ramit, Bhupendra, Madesh and Pratibha all under the age of 18 years.
(2.)THE relevant clauses which bear on this subject are set out in extenso in the several paragraphs of the plaint and it will be necessary to refer to the several clauses for the purpose of a proper construction of the effect of this deed of trust.
(3.)IN approaching this question, the main points to be decided are what was the dominant intention of the settlor as gathered from the reading of these several clauses in the deed of trust and who are the beneficiaries under this deed of trust. In other words whether the dominant intention was to benefit a section who formed the object of the trusts sufficiently large to be recognised as part of the public and whether the provisions of the deed affect a charitable trust, that is to say whether charity is the main intention as gathered on the clauses of this deed of trust and whether the primary class to be benefited forms part of the public.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.