RAJYASHREE Vs. RAJMATA SUSHILA KUMARI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.By the impugned order the learned trial court has disposed of two applications of the petitioner dated 4.11.97 and 17.1.98 filed for amendment of the plaint and has declined the permission to amend the plaint.

(2.) The plaintiff had filed the present suit in Oct., 1993 interalia seeking declarations regarding resolutions of the meeting of the trust and decisions taken there at dated 13.3.93 to be null and void. The main controversy in the suit includes a controversy about defendant No. 1 having been appointed as president of the trust instead of the plaintiff, defendant No. 4 having been appointed as secretary instead of defendant No. 7 and so on. In this suit written statement has been filed and counter claim has also been lodged. The suit thereafter has not registered any progress further.

(3.) By the application for amendment what the plaintiff seeks to add is that pursuant to the resolution dated 13.3.93, action had been taken before the authorities under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, as the trust, plaintiff claims to be president whereof, is admittedly public trust registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act. That action taken before the authorities under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act ultimately culminated into the order of the Commissioner Devasthan dated 13.5.97 whereby, the appeal was dismissed against the order of Assistant Commissioner Devasthan dated 19.5.95 whereby changes had been effected in the entries of the register of Public Trusts. According to the petitioner this being, firstly a subsequent event, secondly an action taken pursuant to the resolution dated 13.3.93 which precisely constitute subject matter of the suit, could even otherwise be taken cognizance by learned trial court as subsequent event, in order to avoid multiplicity of litigation and in order to avoid complication the plaintiff expressly wanted to assail that order in the present suit itself.