AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Honourable Mr. Justice G. Rajasuria
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner would echo the cri de coeur of his client that the Lower
Court, without numbering the plaint, simply rejected it as not maintainable.
A poring over of the averments made in the plaint as well as the order passed by the Lower Court, would display and convey that the plaintiff is
interested in seeing that the Trust Property in the hands of D-1 is not dissipated. If that be so, I am at a loss to understand how he can approach
the Munsif Court with the following prayer:
A)Declaring that the suit property is the Govt. Poramboke land and it was and assigned to the 1st defendant with condition and for limited purpose
and consequentially,
B)Granting a permanent injunction, restraining the 1st defendant, his men and agents and everybody acting and claiming under him from in any way
and in any manner, using and enjoying any portion of the suit ''A'' Schedule Property for commercial purpose,
C)Granting a permanent injunction restraining the 1st defendant, his men and agents and everybody acting and claiming under him in any way and
in any manner, putting up any construction in the suit ''A'' Schedule Property for any commercial purpose,
4)B)Granting such other and further reliefs as this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstance of the case.
4(E)Directing the defendants to pay the plaintiff the cost of the suit and thus render justice.
Section 92 of CPC would contemplate filing of a suit by two persons with the leave of the Court, so as to safeguard the Trust Properties as well
as the proper functioning of the Trust and also for passing a scheme decree. Instead of resorting to such measures, the plaintiff approached the
Munsif Court which is not the competent Court. I see no perversity or illegality in the order passed by the Lower Court.
Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.