Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas - (1.) THE name whereby the trust is called is the first petitioner. A trust being a mere obligation cannot be sued in the name it is called; nor can it sue in such name. The second petitioner claims that she is one of the trustees for the trust. In view of the provisions of ss.47 and 48 of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882, the second petitioner is not competent to act alone in execution of the trust; for there is nothing to show that the instrument of trust entitles her to act alone in execution of the trust.
(2.) I am unable to see how the provisions of O.31 CPC relied on by Mr Bhattacharya appearing for the petitioner can apply to the case. I am, however, minded to accept his request for leave to withdraw this WP with liberty to file a fresh WP on the same cause of action. For these reasons, I allow the oral prayer for withdrawal with liberty. This WP is dismissed. No costs. Certified xerox.;