S.S. Dhavan, J. - (1.) This is an appeal by the Government of the State of Uttar Pradesh against the decree of the learned Civil Judge Farrukhabad directing the Government to refund a sum of Rs. 500/-which was donated by the plaintiff respondent M/s Sham Sunder Lal Ram Charan in the year 1945. The facts are these : In March 1945 several meetings Were held in Farrukhabad under the authority of the District Magistrate at which an appeal was made to the public to subscribe to a fund for the erection of a women's hospital at Chhibramau. The plaintiff firm contributed a sum of Rs. 500/-towards this fund and paid the amount in cash on 1st June, 1945. It was alleged by the firm that subsequently they came to know that the scheme for the construction of the hospital had been abandoned. Thereupon it wrote to the Government asking for the refund of their money which had been donated according to them on the express understanding that it would be utilised for the purpose of erecting a a hospital. On 6th April, 1946, the District Magistrate sent a reply that the plaintiffs subscription was voluntary, that the amount paid by him had been credited to "His Excellency's War Purposes Fund" and that "as the account had been closed, Government was not prepared to make any refund." This did not satisfy the plaintiff firm and on 18-11-1946 it served a notice under Section 80 C. P. C. calling upon the Government to refund the amount. On 29-7-1947 another letter was sent by the plaintiff firm to the Collector inquiring if any steps bad been taken for the implementation of the scheme for the construction of the hospital. No reply appears to have been sent to this letter and on 17-3-1948 the firm filed their suit for the recovery of the amount donated by it. It was stated in the plaint that the money had been donated on a clear understanding that it would be utilised and spent for the erection of a women's hospital and that the Government was a trustee of the money. The plaintiff claimed that as the Government had abandoned the scheme for building a hospital the object of the trust had failed and the plaintiff was entitled to a refund of his money which was lying unused with the defendant.
(2.) The Government of Uttar Pradesh contested the suit and resisted the firm's claim to a refund. It was, however, admitted that in 1945 the Collector of Farrukhabad had held a meeting in which certain sums of money were donated by the public for the purpose of establishing a female dispensary at Chhibramau. The receipt of a donation from the plaintiff firm was admitted and also that District Magistrate wrote to the plaintiff that its money had been diverted to the War Purposes Fund. It was, however, pleaded that, due to constitutional and political changes, the establishment of the dispensary had been delayed but the idea had never been dropped. It was further stated by a resolution of the Committee (presumably the Advisory Committee of the district) dated 9th April 1948, it was decided that a sum of Rs. 5000/- be added to the amount received by the public and the entire fund should be utilized for constructing a women's ward to be attached to the existing District Board Hospital at! Chhibramau. This resolution was sent to the Govt. for approval on 5th May 1948. The written statement did not reveal whether the Government had given its approval, but it was categorically denied that the scheme for the construction of a female dispensary at Chhibramau had been abandoned.
(3.) The trial court held that the donation was paid to the Government on trust for a specific purpose and that the scheme for erecting a hospital had been abandoned. It further held that the purpose of the trust having failed the plaintiff was entitled to a refund of Rs. 500/- donated by him. In appeal the learned Civil Judge upheld the findings and the decree of the trial court. The State has now come to this court in Second Appeal.;