Madras High Court
T.A.Maruthachalam vs The Besant Centenary Trust on 8 August, 2022
S.A.No. 1722/2004
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.08.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
S.A.No. 1722 of 2004
1. T.A.Maruthachalam
2. T.M.Mohanraj ... Appellants/Appellants/Plaintiffs
Vs.
1. The Besant Centenary Trust
Rep. by its President
Thiruvanmiyur,
Madras – 600 041.
2. Sri Maranna Gowder High School
by its Secretary C.R.Bhaskaran
Sulivan Street, Coimbatore-1
... Respondents/Respondents/Defendants
PRAYER: This Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Civil
Procedure Code, against the Judgment and Decree dated 13.01.2003 made
in A.S.No. 69 of 2001 on the file of First Additional District Judge cum
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore, confirming the Judgment and
Decree dated 16.02.2001 made in O.S.No. 428 of 1996 on the file of
Principal Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1
S.A.No. 1722/2004
For Appellants : Ms. G.Sumithra
for Mr.B.T.Doraisamy
For Respondents : Mr. J.Antony Jesus
(Amicus Curie)
JUDGMENT
The plaintiffs in O.S.No. 428 of 1996 on the file of the Principal Sub
Court, Coimbatore are the appellants herein.
2. The first plaintiff is the father of the second plaintiff. They had filed
the suit seeking a direction to frame a scheme for proper and effective
management of Sri Rao Sahib Maranna Gowder School, Sulivan Street,
Coimbatore, in accordance with the trust deed dated 24.11.1915 and to
remove the first defendant from the administration of the School and to
appoint the first plaintiff as the proper person to carry out the
administration of the school and for costs of the suit.
3. The plaintiffs T.A.Maruthachalam and his sons T.M.Mohanraj, stated
that the School called Sri Maranna Gowder High School at Sulivan Street
in Coimbatore was founded by late Sri Maranna Gowder along with
S.A.No. 1722/2004
C.T.Thiruvenkataswamy and S.N.Ramaswamy Iyer. It was originally
called “Anne Besant Girls High School”. They handed over the
management of the School to the then Theosophical Educational Trust at
Adayar, in then Madras by trust deed dated 24.11.1915. From that date
onwards, the Theosophical Educational Trust was in management of the
School. It was stated that such handing over of the management was done
with the hope that the Theosophical Educational Trust would further the
interest of the School and advance it and ensure that the students, who
studied there are given proper education and that the administrator would
also administer the School keeping in mind the fact that they had been
handed over management only to ensure that the School functions properly
and effectively.
4. The plaintiffs, however claimed that their hopes failed owing to various
acts of mismanagement which they charged particularly against the first
defendant, who was the President of the Besant Centenary Trust, Adyar,
Madras. The second defendant was the Maranna Gowder High School
represented by its Secretary, C.R.Baskaran.
S.A.No. 1722/2004
5. Among the various grievances raised by the plaintiffs in the plaint were
that about ½ acre of land which had been so donated for the purpose of the
School has been encroached by third parties and the management, namely,
the first defendant, had not taken any effective steps to remove such
encroachment. It was also claimed that the accounts were not being
properly maintained and even a compound wall were not built. It was also
stated that the buildings were in a dilapidated condition. Raising such
grievances, the suit was filed.
6. The defendants entered appearance on receipt of suit summons and
filed a written statement denying and disputing the averments made in the
plaint. Specific effort was made to point out that there was advancement
in the progress of the School. Among various steps, it was claimed that the
School which was originally handed over in the year 1915 was upgraded to
a boys/girls middle school in the year 1962 and later to a high school in the
year 1990. It was stated that as on the date of the filing of the written
statement, there were nearly 450 children undergoing education in the
High School and about 500 children undergoing education upto the middle
school level. It was stated that Classes 1 to 8 were aided classes and class 9
S.A.No. 1722/2004
to 10 were self financing classes. With respect to upgrading the
construction, it was stated that about five class rooms had been additional
built at a cost of Rs.1,70,000/- and a further sum of Rs.1,10,000/- had been
spent for putting up further class rooms. It was also stated that for
upgrading the School from middle school to high school, a sum of Rs.1/-
lakh had been deposited as directed by the statutory authorities. It was also
stated that a primary school had been started and three separate rooms had
been identified for that particular purpose. It had been stated that there has
been a gradual growth in the strength of the School and that the general
public have expressed confidence with respect to the manner in which the
School was being run and the number of students also increased. It was
therefore stated that the suit is vexatious and does not deserve any
consideration.
7. On the basis of the above pleadings, the learned trial Judge, namely,
the Principal Sub Judge, Coimbatore, had framed necessary issues and had
invited the parties to adduce oral and documentary evidence.
S.A.No. 1722/2004
8. The first plaintiff examined himself as PW-1 and another individual
Ponnuswamy was examined as PW.2. The Secretary of the School
C.R.Baskaran was examined as DW-1. The plaintiffs marked Exs. A-1 to
A-19. Ex.A-1 was a certified copy of the Trust Deed dated 24.11.1915 by
which, the Management of the School was handed over to the first
defendant. The other documents were correspondences exchange between
the plaintiffs and the defendants with the plaintiffs complaining about
various defects. The defendants marked Exs. B-1 to B-3. Ex.B-2 was a
report of the Commissioner of Land Administration in Madras and Ex.B-3
were details with respect to the grants received by the School.
9. The trial Court examined the evidence of PW-1 and found that PW-1
during the course of his evidence, had admitted that to a large extent, he
was satisfied with the work done by the Secretary of the School, namely,
C.R.Baskaran, who had given evidence as DW-1. To his credit, PW-1 has
stated quite honestly in the witness box that DW-1/C.R.Baskaran had been
doing commendable work after assuming charge as Secretary and that the
Management of the School had been placed in effective hands and that he
has no complaints.
S.A.No. 1722/2004
10. I would also place commendation on the first plaintiff since, when
he had grievances or issues to be raised, he had instituted the suit but when
issues have been solved by the time when he came to tender evidence, he
had graciously admitted that the management is functioning properly and
the school is being run in the manner in which the original owners thought
it should be run.
11. Placing reliance of such evidence, the suit was dismissed, by the
Principal Sub Judge, Coimbatore, by Judgment dated 16.02.2001.
12. An Appeal was however filed in A.S.No. 69 of 2001 which came up
for consideration before the First Additional District Court / Chief Judicial
Magistrate at Coimbatore and by Judgment dated 13.01.2003, the learned
First Appellate Judge also was of the opinion that it would only be
appropriate that the said findings on facts which were based on the
evidence or admissions of PW-1 should not be interfered with and
therefore dismissed the Appeal Suit.
S.A.No. 1722/2004
13. The plaintiff then filed the present Second Appeal. The appeal has
been pending before this Court from the year 2004 onwards. It had been
admitted on the following substantial questions of law:-
“Whether the Courts below were right in
dismissing the suit when the suit has been filed for
framing a scheme particularly in view of the
admission made by D.W.1 himself?”
14. Heard arguments advanced by Ms. G.Sumithra for Mr.
B.T.Doraisamy, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr.J.Antony Jesus,
learned counsel who had been appointed as amicus to assist the Court on
behalf of the respondents since the respondents had not engaged any
counsel even though notice had been served and names have been printed
in the cause list.
15. I must place my appreciation for the extremely sanguine manner in
which the learned counsel Ms. G.Sumithra and the learned amicus
Mr.J.Antony Jesus put forth their respective points. They realised that the
subject matter was with respect to the management of a School which is
S.A.No. 1722/2004
now functioning and therefore, they advanced the arguments with much
responsibility.
16. The admission of PW-1 that the management was in safe hands with
Mr.C.R.Baskaran, the Secretary of the School was pointed out and hope
was unanimously expressed that the management would continue to
effectively discharge the noble aims for which the management of the
School was handed over by Ex.A-1 Trust Deed in the year 1915. Iti s
evident from the records that there has been a steady up-gradation of the
School also.
17. The only point of grievance is with respect to the ½ acre of land that
is claimed to have been encroached. A caveat is therefore placed on the
respondents and I am confident that the learned counsel for the appellants
and also the amicus would impress upon the defendants/respondents
herein, the necessity to take appropriate legal steps to remove such
encroachment ensure that the property is retained as it was handed over to
the defendants for running of the School.
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
S.A.No. 1722/2004
vsg
18. The Second Appeal stands dismissed however with the above
observations. No costs.
08.08.2022
Index :Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
vsg
To
1. I Additional District Court cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore.
2. Subordinate Court, Coimbatore.
S.A.No. 1722 of 2004
