Madras High Court
Bharathidasan vs Karur Sri Ramakrishna ... on 9 April, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.789 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 09.04.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.789 of 2021
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.3565 of 2021
Bharathidasan : Appellant
Vs.
1.Karur Sri Ramakrishna Educational
And Charitable Trust,
Represented by its Secretary,
Mr.Sasikumar,
S/o. Mahalingam,
Door No.69/36, Mela Agraharam,
Krishnarayapuram, Karur District.
2.The District Registrar,
Karur District, Karur.
3.The Sub Registrar,
Krishnarayapuram Sub Registry,
Krishnarayapuram,
Karur District. : Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
W.A.(MD)No.789 of 2021
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent,
praying to allow the appeal and set aside the order of this Court made in
W.P.(MD)No.10811 of 2020 dated 24.03.2021.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Murali
for Mr.S.Prem Kumar
For Respondents 2&3 : Mr.K.Sathiya Singh
Additional Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
***************
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]
By consent of both parties, the appeal itself is taken up for final
disposal.
2.Heard Mr.R.Murali, for Mr.S.Prem Kumar, learned Counsel
appearing for the appellant and Mr.K.Sathiya Singh, learned Additional
Government Pleader appearing for respondents 2 & 3.
3.This appeal is directed against the order dated 24.03.2021,
passed in W.P.(MD)No.10811 of 2020, filed by the first respondent Trust.
The appellant before us was the third respondent in the writ petition.
The first respondent Trust filed a writ petition, challenging a check slip
issued by the third respondent herein namely, the Sub-Registrar,
Krishnarayapuram Sub Registry, Krishnarayapuram, Karur District,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.789 of 2021
refusing to accept a supplementary Trust Deed for registration on the
ground that the appellant has given an objection that he has filed a suit in
O.S.No.276 of 2019, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Kulithalai, for
a decree of permanent injunction to restrain the first defendant being the
first respondent / writ petitioner, from in any manner creating any kind of
alienation or encumbrance over the suit schedule property without the
permission of the District Court, Karur. Further, the first respondent to
restrain defendants 29 and 30, who are the Sub Registrar,
Krishnarayapuram and the District Registrar, Karur, respectively, from in
any manner register any kind of document in respect of the suit schedule
property, if placed by the defendants 1 to 28 or any persons claiming
under them for transferring the title of the suit schedule property from
the first respondent / first defendant Trust to the name of any other
persons without the permission of the District Court, Karur.
4.The case of the appellant is that by virtue of the
supplementary deed of Trust, the existing and continuing 12 trustees are
sought to be replaced by another 12 new trustees, to facilitate the
alienation of the Trust property and the same is being surreptitiously
done to bye-pass the procedure under the Trust Act, which mandates that
permission of the District Court concerned has to be obtained. The
learned Writ Court, after considering and placing on record the
undertaking given by the writ petitioner dated 28.02.2021, allowed the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.789 of 2021
writ petition and set aside the check slip issued by the Sub Registrar and
directed him to register the document namely supplementary Trust Deed
dated 02.03.2020, without reference to the pending suit filed by the
appellant and also recording the undertaking given by the first
respondent / writ petitioner Trust.
5.Learned Counsel would submit that if a supplementary Trust
Deed is allowed to be registered, the composition of the Trust would
change and it would facilitate alienation of the Trust property and the
Trust is trying to indirectly achieve what they cannot achieve directly.
Unless the permission of the district court is obtained, the Trust
properties cannot be alienated.
6.We find that in the suit, there is no interim direction issued
restraining the Sub-Registrar from exercising his powers conferred under
the provisions of the Registration Act and the rules framed thereunder.
Furthermore, the suit concerns the property alone and there is no
separate declaratory prayer in respect of the composition of the Trust or
the manner in which the structure of the trustees would change, upon
registration of the supplementary deed. In any event, it is for the
appellant to pray for appropriate orders in the pending civil suit. In the
absence of any interim order granted in the suit, the registering authority
cannot be restrained.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.789 of 2021
7.In our considered view, the interest of the Trust property has
been sufficiently safeguarded by the learned Writ Court, by directing an
undertaking affidavit to be filed by the Trust and the said undertaking to
be recorded by the Sub- Registrar while entertaining the supplementary
Trust deed dated 02.03.2020. Therefore, we find that there is no ground
made out by the appellant to interfere with the order passed by the
learned writ Court. All that we can observe is that any such registration
would be subject to the outcome of the civil proceedings, because the suit
was filed much earlier to the supplementary Trust deed.
8.With the above observation, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed.
However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
[T.S.S., J.] & [S.A.I., J.]
09.04.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
MR
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.789 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
AND
S.ANANTHI, J.
MR
To
1.The District Registrar,
Karur District, Karur.
2.The Sub Registrar,
Krishnarayapuram Sub Registry,
Krishnarayapuram,
Karur District.
JUDGMENT MADE IN
W.A.(MD)No.789 of 2021
09.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
