Case at a Glance
A life trustee of a Faridabad public charitable trust executed a registered Will in 2015 naming her son, who had been removed as a trustee, as ‘head’ of the trust after her death, and naming another person as nominee. The trust sued to declare the Will void to the extent it conferred trusteeship, but the trial and appellate courts refused an interim injunction. The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the power under the trust deed to nominate a successor belonged only to the founder, that a trustee’s office is personal and does not devolve by succession, and that “the trusteeship of a public charitable trust is not personal property that can be bequeathed like an ordinary estate”. It restrained both claimants from acting as trustees under the Will, ordered half-yearly accounts and asked the trial court to decide the suit within a year.
The trust was created under a deed dated 2 June 1989 and is undisputedly a public charitable trust. In 2004 the founder-trustee appointed his wife and two sons as life trustees; he died in 2007. In 2015 one son (Defendant No. 2) was removed as trustee by resolution after an incident involving the trust’s sewadars, and litigation over that removal followed. The founder’s widow executed a registered Will on 6 October 2015 leaving her property to that son and stating that he would be ‘the head’ of the trusts after her death, with Defendant No. 1 named as nominee and both as joint executors. She died on 7 August 2019.
The trust filed CS No. 3313 of 2019 for a declaration that the Will is void insofar as it confers trusteeship, with an injunction. An interim restraint granted in 2019 was later followed by dismissal of the injunction application by the Civil Judge, Faridabad on 6 March 2026 — relying on the Will’s registration and Clause 6(b) of the trust deed — and dismissal of the appeal by the Additional District Judge on 6 July 2026. The trust filed a revision under Article 227.
The Key Question Before the Court
Can a co-trustee of a public charitable trust nominate a successor trustee, or the ‘head’ of the trust, through her Will?
A Personal Office of Confidence, Not an Inheritable Estate
Citing Wander Ltd. v. Antox India (P) Ltd., (1990) 04 SC CK 0020, Shalini Shyam Shetty v. Rajendra Shankar Patil, (2010) 07 SC CK 0089 and Radhey Shyam v. Chhabi Nath, (2015) 02 SC CK 0020, the Court accepted that interference with discretionary interim orders is limited, but held it is warranted where courts misread the basic document or proceed on a wrong legal premise. Clause 6(b) of the deed gave the power of nomination to the single founder-trustee and “does not prima facie contemplate that each member of a plural body of successor-trustees may” nominate successors. Drawing on principles reflected in Sections 47, 73 and 75 of the Indian Trusts Act, though that Act does not apply to public charitable trusts, the Court noted that “a trustee’s office is a personal one of confidence, which does not devolve by succession.”
It held that “The trusteeship of a public charitable trust is not personal property that can be bequeathed like an ordinary estate” and that “On this limited issue, the plaintiff has established a strong prima facie case.” Relying on Deoraj v. State of Maharashtra, (2004) 04 SC CK 0073, it held that interim relief would only preserve the status quo, and following Vidyodaya Trust v. Mohan Prasad R., (2008) 02 SC CK 0132, it rejected the objection that the suit was barred under Section 92 CPC. The balance of convenience favoured the trust, as Defendant No. 1 held no office in the testatrix’s lifetime and Defendant No. 2’s removal had not been stayed.
What the Court Actually Held
- The power to nominate a successor under Clause 6(b) of the trust deed belonged only to the founder-trustee, not to each later co-trustee.
- Trusteeship of a public charitable trust is a personal office and cannot be bequeathed by Will; the trust made out a strong prima facie case on this issue.
- Defendant No. 1 was restrained from acting or holding herself out as a trustee, and Defendant No. 2 from claiming to be a trustee or head of the trust, on the strength of the Will, until the suit is decided.
- The trustees must maintain accounts of all receipts, including donation-box collections, and file half-yearly statements before the trial court; the trial court is to endeavour to decide the suit within one year.
Why This Judgment Matters
- Disputes over control of temples, gurudwaras, schools and charitable trusts often turn on Wills; this ruling makes clear that the office itself is not inheritable.
- It distinguishes between property a trustee may own personally and the trust’s management, which is held in confidence for the public.
- The accounting direction protects donations while the dispute is pending.
What Should Advocates Take Away From the Judgment?
For Trusts and Trustees
- Check the trust deed for who may nominate successors and how.
- A Will cannot confer trusteeship unless the deed validly provides for it.
- Maintain proper accounts of all receipts, including donation boxes.
For Counsel
- Read the succession clause of the trust deed closely; misreading the basic document justifies Article 227 interference.
- A suit by a public trust against those claiming management need not fall under Section 92 CPC (Vidyodaya Trust).
- Registration of a Will does not settle whether it can confer an office.
Key Takeaways
- Trusteeship of a public trust cannot be bequeathed by Will.
- Nomination power under the deed was the founder’s alone.
- Will-based claimants restrained from acting as trustees.
- Half-yearly accounts; suit to be decided within a year.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a trustee pass on trusteeship of a public charitable trust through a Will?
Prima facie no. The Court held that trusteeship is a personal office of confidence that does not devolve by succession and is not property that can be bequeathed like an ordinary estate.
Did the High Court declare the Will void?
No. The ruling is at the interim stage. It restrained the defendants from acting as trustees under the Will until the suit is decided, and clarified that its observations are prima facie.
What other directions were given?
The trustees must keep accounts of all receipts, including donation-box collections, and file half-yearly statements before the trial court, which is to try to decide the suit within one year.
Conclusion
The Court separated what a trustee owns from what she merely holds in trust: personal property may pass by Will, but the right to manage a public charity does not.
Practical takeaway: In succession disputes over trusts, begin with the trust deed’s nomination clause; a registered Will cannot by itself make someone a trustee of a public charitable trust.
For more judgments, legal opinions and case analysis, visit courtkutchehry.com