- (1.) THIS is a revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgement and order dated 21.7.2005 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.5 Lakhimpur Kheri by which the learned Judge has granted permission to the opposite parties to file suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2.) THE opposite parties appeared by finding the caveat and I have heard the learned counsel for the revisionist and the opposite parties finally on merit. The opposite parties nos.1 to 5 moved an application under Section 92 C.P.C. for permission to file a suit for removal of trustees from the Trust and for breach to the terms and conditions of the trust of the temple of Thakurji Maharaj in Mohalla Dixitaana Goal Gokaran Nath which was admittedly constructed by Smt. Vidya Kunwari. It was alleged that a trust was created for public purposes and the opposite parties nos.1 to 5 in this revision are Hindus and are followers of Sanatan Dharm. It was alleged that the applicants used to perform the religious rites i.e. Puja and Archana and the temple is a public temple. It was pleaded that Smt. Vidya Kunwari created a trust on 22.7.1947 under a registered deed of trust with respect to the properties mentioned therein and formed a committee for the management of the said trust. It was provided in the trust deed that Smt. Vidya Kunwari will be Sarvakar during her life time and thereafter the revisionist, Badri Prasad and Bansh Gopal were appointed as trustees and they were given the right to manage the properties of the trust and to utilise the same for the object of the trust and no rights were conferred on them to alienate the property belonging to the trust. It was alleged that after the death of Bansh Gopal, one of the trustees, no other trustee was appointed in terms of the deed of the trust and the trust is being managed by the revisionist and Badri Prasad the remaining two trustees who are not taking any interest, rather they are utilising the property of the trust for their own benefit as their personal property.
(3.) THE application for seeking permission for filling of the suit was contested by the revisionist alongwith Smt. Shanti Pandey who died during the pendency of the application under Section 92 of the C.P.C. on the ground that Smt. Vidya Kunwari constructed a private temple and installed deity of Thakurji Maharaj and created a private trust for its management through registered trust deed dated 22.7.1943. It was alleged that under the said trust deed, Smt Vidya Kunwari appointed herself to be the trustee for the management of the trust in her life time and thereafter revisionist, Badri Prasad and Bansh Gopal were appointed as trustees. It was alleged that right to manage the trust was conferred on the revisionist as a trustee for his life time and thereafter his generation after generation will remain Mutwali (trustees). Beside three trustees referred to above appointed by Smt. Vidya Kunwari, she had also made a provision in the deed of trust for the appointment of five arbitrators who will provide assistance to the trustees in the management of the trust properties.;