Principal civil court jurisdiction governs breach of trust suits; City Civil Court is not the proper forum absent express statutory provision.

A suit alleging breach of trust under the Indian Trusts Act, 1882 is treated as cognisable only by the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction, because the Act repeatedly assigns core trust functions to that forum. Section 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure does not displace that special jurisdiction where the statute itself identifies the adjudicating court. The Bombay Civil Courts Act, 1869 and the Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948 create the City Civil Court as an additional civil court for Greater Bombay, not as the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction, so it cannot try such a suit unless the statute expressly confers that role.

---

---

Issues: Whether a suit alleging breach of trust under the Indian Trusts Act, 1882 must be instituted before the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction, and whether the City Civil Court at Bombay answers that description for such a suit.

Analysis: The Indian Trusts Act, 1882 repeatedly refers to the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction in connection with core trust matters, including directions, permission, control, advice, and appointment or discharge of trustees. Those references were treated as showing that a suit for breach of trust is cognisable only by that court. Section 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was held inapplicable to displace that special forum, because the Act itself identifies the court of adjudication. The Bombay Civil Courts Act, 1869 and the Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948 were read as creating a hierarchy in which the City Civil Court is an additional civil court for Greater Bombay, not a District Court and not the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction. The High Court's ordinary original civil jurisdiction was found to remain distinct, and the City Civil Court was not elevated to the principal forum merely because it could try civil suits within its pecuniary limits.

Conclusion: The City Civil Court lacked jurisdiction to try the suit, and the objection to jurisdiction was upheld in favour of the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside on the ground of want of jurisdiction, and the appeal succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: A suit for breach of trust under the Indian Trusts Act lies only before the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction, and an additional civil court is not that forum unless the statute expressly so provides.

---