Civil court jurisdiction barred where dispute concerned public trust existence, succession, administration and trust property under the Bombay Public Trusts Act.

The plaint, read as a whole, was found to concern the existence, succession, administration, possession and control of property of a public trust, rather than a separate civil dispute. The Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 was treated as a self-contained code assigning exclusive jurisdiction to the Charity Commissioner and related authorities to decide issues such as whether a trust exists, whether property belongs to it, changes in entries, registration, breach of trust and recovery of trust property. Because Section 80 barred civil court intervention in matters reserved to that statutory scheme, the suit could not be maintained in civil court.

---

---

Issues: Whether the civil court's jurisdiction was barred by the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 in a suit seeking declarations and injunctions concerning dissolution of a church society, succession to the trust, and rights over trust property.

Analysis: The plaint was examined as a whole and, in substance, it disclosed a dispute about the existence, succession, administration, possession, and control of property of a public trust. The statutory scheme of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 was treated as a self-contained code conferring exclusive jurisdiction on the Charity Commissioner and allied authorities to decide whether a trust exists, whether particular property belongs to it, changes in entries, questions of registration, and suits concerning breaches of trust or recovery of trust property. In view of the finality attached to determinations under the Act and the express bar in Section 80, civil court jurisdiction could not be invoked to adjudicate matters which the Act committed to the statutory authorities. The court also held that the pleadings did not establish a distinct, separable society-side dispute divorced from the trust-side controversy, and the reliefs sought would necessarily require adjudication on matters reserved to the statutory forum.

Conclusion: The suit was not maintainable in the civil court and the bar under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 applied.

---