INDIAN TRUST ACT 1882 PDF

adminComment(0)

Short title. Commencement.-This Act may be called the Indian. Trusts Act, and it shall come into force on the first day of. March, Local extent, Savings . Full text containing the act, Indian Trusts Act, , with all the sections, schedules, short title, enactment date, and footnotes. Indian Trusts Act, is an Act in India related to private trusts and trustees. The act defines bestthing.info


Indian Trust Act 1882 Pdf

Author:DEWAYNE LOADHOLT
Language:English, Portuguese, Dutch
Country:Rwanda
Genre:Environment
Pages:161
Published (Last):30.11.2015
ISBN:473-2-67793-507-9
ePub File Size:24.88 MB
PDF File Size:16.61 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Sign up for free]
Downloads:32442
Uploaded by: AHMED

INDIAN TRUSTS ACT, Arrangement of Sections. SECTION. PAGE. CHAPTER I. PRELIMINARY. 1. Short title, commencement. 5. 2. Repeal of enactments. Preamble1 - INDIAN TRUSTS ACT, Chapter I. Section1 - Short title, Commencement. Section2 - Repeal of enactments. Section3 - Interpretation- clause. Mortgage of land pledged to Government under Act 26 of Section Sale by trustee directed to sell within specified time. Section

Section50 - Trustee may not charge for services. Section51 - Trustee may not use trust-property for his own profit. Section52 - Trustee for sale or his agent may not download.

Section53 - Trustee may not download beneficiary's interest without permission. Section54 - Co-trustees may not lend to one of themselves. Section57 - Bight to inspect and take copies of instrument of trust, accounts, etc. Section58 - Right to transfer beneficial interest.

Indian Trusts Act, 1882

Section59 - Right to sue for execution or trust. Section61 - Right to compel to any act of duty.

Section63 - Following trust-property into the hands of third persons. Section64 - Savings of rights of certain transferees.

Item Preview

Section65 - Acquisition by trustee of trust-property wrongfully converted. Section67 - Wrongful employment by partner-trustee of trust-property for partnership purposes.

Section68 - Liability of beneficiary joining in breach of trust. Section69 - Rights and liabilities of beneficiary's transferee. Section72 - Petition to be discharged from trust. Section73 - Appointment of new trustees on death, etc. Section75 - Vesting of trust-property in new trustees. Section79 - Revocation not to defeat what trustees have duly done. Section80 - Where obligation in nature of trust is created. Section81 - Where it does not appears that transferor intended to dispose of beneficial interest.

Section82 - Transfer to one for consideration paid by another. Section83 - Trust incapable of execution or executed without exhausting trust-property. Section86 - Transfer pursuant to rescindable contract. Section87 - Debtor becoming creditor's representative.

Section89 - Advantage gained by exercise of undue influence. Section90 - Advantage gained by qualified owner. Section91 - Property acquired with notice of existing contract.

Section92 - download by person contracting to download property to be held on trust. Various judgments have been cited. However, in my opinion, only some of them need to be referred to which are relevant for the purposes of disposing of the preliminary issue. While considering the scope and ambit of the Indian Trusts Act, certain observations of this Court in the case of Devlakshmi Harisukh Vahalia v.

Procedure for Registration of Trust under the Indian Trusts Act 1882

Vishwakant P. In cases covered by the Act, therefore, the provisions of the Act alone must be applied, but in any case not covered by the Act, the Court is entitled to apply rules of English Law, as laid down by judicial decisions in that country which are not inconsistent with the Act, and the rules of justice, equity and good conscience.

This duty is constantly being performed by the substitution of new trustees in the place of original trustees for a variety of reasons in non-contentious cases.

It may be mentioned at this stage that as rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the observations therein are obiter as the issue need not have been decided. However, I am referring to the said observations as some other Courts have followed the principles as expounded in the case of Nathabhai.

Marten, C. Speaking generally, applications for the removal of a trustee should undoubtedly be brought by a suit. And where, as here, it is alleged that the trustees have committed a breach of trust, that suit should ask for the delinquent trustees to make good the breach of trust.

Further, the suit should normally ask for the administration of the trust estate by the Court. The learned Chief Justice referred to some commentaries on Trust.

Most Searched

And if it was alleged that specific breaches of trust had been committed, then those could be inquired into in the ordinary way on oral evidence and not on affidavit evidence without any cross-examination, the course that has been adopted by the learned Judge in the present case. The next relevant Judgment is in the case of Tirathdas Dharmadas v.

The matter arose from a Second Appeal. The District Judge had, under section 74, directed removal of the trustees. The District Judge held in favour of the Plaintiffs and directed removal of the trustees.

That is how the matter reached the Court. A preliminary objection was raised that no appeal lies against an Order passed under section The said contention was upheld and the matter was considered as an application for revision of the Order. While considering the expression as to what is unfit, Devis, C.

Thereafter the Division Bench approved the principles laid down by this Court in the case of Nathabhai Devidas v. Vaghjibhai Jhaverbhai for the proposition that section 73 is not intended ordinary to apply to removal of a trustee for breach of trust. The trend of English decisions appears to limit proceedings to the removal or discharge of trustees other than by suits to non-contentious, or as the phrase goes, non-litigious matters. The petition follows a vacancy or disqualification which is a condition precedent, the existence of which is not dependent upon an adjudication by the Court in the same proceeding.

My conclusion in the matter is that sections 73 and 74 are not intended to apply to contentious or disputed cases, where proceeding by way of suit is appropriate, but to cases appropriate to a summary procedure where the facts are not disputed or cannot reasonably be disputed.

In a separate concurring Judgment, Weston J, observed that sections 73 and 74 do not provide expressly for the removal of a trustee. They provide for the appointment of a new trustee. But under clause d of section 71, a trustee is discharged by the appointment, under the Act, of a new trustee in his place. Section 73 deals with such appointment not by the Court, but by the person nominated for the purpose in the instrument of trust, or if there be no such person, by the author of the trust, if alive or by the surviving trustee or trustees and so on.

The right to apply under section 74 is subject to the restriction that an appointment under section 73 is found to be impracticable, but it seems necessary to hold that in certain circumstances the right of a beneficiary to require that the trust shall be administered by proper persons may be secured not only by suit on grounds contemplated in section 60, but alternatively by application made under section The learned Judge thereafter proceeded to answer the question as to how the Court was found to form an opinion contemplated in section 73, when it is sought under that section, or when it becomes necessary on application made under section The wording of sections 73 and 74 does not of itself suggest that investigation is contemplated.

No doubt under section 60 the right of suit must be confined to the beneficiary, but there can be no practical difficulty in all necessary changes in the personnel of the trustees being effected through the beneficiary. It is difficult to believe that, when a remedy by suit exists, a summary investigation should be possible, involving findings of fact which may reflect seriously upon the character of a trustee, from which that trustee will have no remedy by way of appeal. J, described as a litigious decision is founded upon sound principles and should be accepted.

The Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court held that for the appointment of a new trustee under section 74 all that is necessary is that a disqualification as specified in section 73 should have occurred. In fact, when section 74 gives power to the Court to appoint a new trustee on the ground of unfitness or personal incapacity of an existing trustee, the proceeding in its very nature cannot be non-contentious.

Indeed, even in the case of appointment of a new trustee in place of a deceased one, the matter may be disputed by rival claimants. It is true that no right of appeal is given by the Act against an order passed under section 74, but the order is revisable.

It may be that the Legislature deliberately provided a speedy procedure for the appointment of a new trustee by section The interests of a trust demand that a trustee should speedily be appointed in circumstances mentioned in section Section 74 therefore gave a speedy remedy to the beneficiaries to have a new trustee appointed. I express no opinion as to whether or not a regular suit for the removal of a trustee and the appointment of another person in his place is maintainable, but even if such a procedure is available for the removal of a trustee and the appointment of a new one, it is an alternative one.

The beneficiary may either move the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction by a petition under section 74 or may bring a regular suit under section 9, Civil Procedure Code.

A last Judgment which has to be referred to and on which much stress has been laid down by the petitioners is the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court, Sujata Manohar J. Sheran L. Kevarona in Trust Petition No. In that case, the petitioners moved for removal of respondent No.

Vaghjibhai Jhaverbhai supra.

In paragraph 8 the learned Judge held that the ratio of that case had no application to the case before the learned Single Judge. It was further observed that in the Petition, before the learned Single Judge, there was no prayer against any trustee for the recovery of any loss caused to the trust by his or her conduct nor is there any submission made in respect of any breach of trust. The learned Single Judge held that in such situation there was no need to direct the petitioners to move by way of a suit and that in the Petition under section 74 such a relief could be granted.

In paragraph 25, the learned Single Judge held that from the attitude of respondent No. To my mind, this judgment cannot be said to be a judgment for the proposition as to what is a contentious or non-contentious issue.

Therefore, applying the above tests, the contention may now be decided. At this stage, I may point out that looking at the language of sections 73 and 74, it is not possible to accept the view taken by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court. I say so more specifically bearing in mind that while interpreting the section, it must be remembered that in some areas the Court may also exercise its equity jurisdiction.

The English principle followed is that in contentious matters section 74 cannot be invoked and the party will have to be relegated to a Suit. The Indian Trusts Act, as pointed out in section 60, Illustration e also provides for such a situation. Apart from that, as pointed out earlier, a look at sections 73 and 74 would indicate that section 74 steps in only when appointment under section 73 becomes impracticable.

The appointment under section 73 can be made in the event a vacancy arises or principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction holds that the person is unfit or personally incapable to act in the trust. Who is to decide that a vacancy has arisen. The trustees cannot decide and till in the vacancy if there are disputes. Can it then be said that as it is impracticable to make appointments under section 73 and therefore appointments are to be made under section Also if the Court opines that a vacancy has arisen then an appointment can be made by the persons named in the Trust.

This opinion in section 73, or appointment in section 74 if there is a vacancy should be read with section A construction which renders any section otiose cannot be adopted. The intent of the legislature must be given effect to.

ACTS AND RULES

The present Act is a pre-independence Act. There is a similar Act in England with similar provisions which has been referred to in the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court and of Sindh High Court.Also if the Court opines that a vacancy has arisen then an appointment can be made by the persons named in the Trust. Unlike trusts, societies may be dissolved.

Unlike income tax, which is a direct tax, GST is an indirect tax, charged by the vendor of goods or services to the consumer and paid to the government. Trustee to protect title to trust-property.

Bequest for illegal purpose. Trustee may not use trust-property for his own profit. Mortgage of land pledged to Government under Act 26 of There is a minimum amount of the applicable fee that has to be paid, via a demand draft, online demand draft or stamp paper of that particular value, at the time of submission of documents. Liability for breach of trust.

ISMAEL from Antioch
I do love sharing PDF docs woefully. Look over my other posts. I have always been a very creative person and find it relaxing to indulge in indoor field hockey.
>