- (1.) The challenge in this appeal is to judgment and decree in Title Suit No.2179 of 1999 passed by the City Civil Court, Calcutta on 29th May, 2009. The suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff has been dismissed.
(2.) The brief facts relating to the present case are as follows: One Ashutosh Law executed a Will on 9th February, 1958. He died on 21st February, 1964. The probate of his Will was obtained on 28th September, 1964. His two sons Subodh Churn Law and Probodh Churn Law inherited Ashutosh's property. Both Subodh and Probodh were married, but had no children. Subodh's wife Renuka Law and Probodh's wife Gita Law were thus left with the property of Ashutosh Law, which they jointly inherited after the demise of the respective husbands. Renuka and Gita executed a deed of trust on 27th May, 1991 dedicating the property being No.168, Bidhan Sarani to the family deities Shri Shri Lakshmi Mata and Shri Shri Jagannath Dev Jew. Renuka was appointed as the trustee along with Alok Kumar Dutt, who is her nephew. Several objects of the trust have been mentioned in the trust deed; inter alia, the performing of the daily rituals and periodical pujas and ceremonies for the deities and the annual Durga Puja. Besides this, the objects were to establish and support educational institutions, hospitals, give financial assistance during natural calamities, etc. Under the trust deed the settlors were permitted to reside in the premises with all amenities and facilities and without being liable to pay rent, occupation charges, corporation taxes, electricity bills, telephone bills, etc. The deed also stipulated that the sister-in-law of the settlors, i.e., Sudhina Sundari Dasi, younger daughter of Ashutosh Law, would be permitted to reside in the trust property without payment of rent or occupation charges, electricity bills, etc. This provision was made in consonance with the last Will and testament of Ashutosh Law who desired that she should reside in his property during her life time.
(3.) The trust deed provided that the respondent/defendant Susanta De, the son of Molina (Ashutosh Law's elder daughter) and the members of his family would be permitted to enjoy four rooms in the property, viz., one room on the ground floor, two rooms on the first floor and one room on the second floor of the inner portion of the trust property, besides being permitted the joint use of other parts of the trust property which they were enjoying when the trust deed was executed. The settlors' desire was that Susanta De and the members of his family should reside in the premises, without payment of any rent or occupation charges or corporation taxes. However they were required to pay 1/3rd of the electricity charges and costs of repairs and maintenance of the portion of the trust property in their use and possession. The deed further stipulated that they would be permitted to reside in the premises that they were occupying and to enjoy the same so long as they desired to live in the trust property. However, it was expressly mentioned in the trust deed that Susanta De and the members of his family would not be entitled to make additions or alterations in the area in their occupation without the written consent of the trustees. They were specifically debarred from inducting the relatives of either Susanta De or the members of his family in the part of the trust property occupied by them. In the event Susanta De or the members of his family wished to reside elsewhere they were expected to deliver vacant and peaceful possession of the trust property.;