TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Interpretation of 'bangsa' in endowment deed, private trust, shebait election consent rule</h1> <h3>Prasaddas Pal Versus Jagannath Pal And Ors.</h3> The court interpreted the term 'bangsa' in the deed of endowment as 'family' rather than limited to lineal descendants. It determined the trust to be ... - Issues: Interpretation of the term 'bangsa' in the deed of endowment; Nature of the trust as public or private; Requirement of consent of all assistant shebaits for the election of shebait.Analysis:1. Interpretation of 'bangsa': The main issue in the judgment was the interpretation of the term 'bangsa' in the deed of endowment. The founder's intention was crucial in determining the meaning of the term. The court concluded that 'bangsa' should be understood as 'family' rather than being limited to lineal descendants. The context of the deed supported this interpretation, as it referred to family members competent to act as shebait in the absence of lineal descendants.2. Nature of the Trust: Another significant issue was whether the trust was public or private in nature. The court deliberated on whether provisions like feeding the poor were incidental to the main purpose of deity worship or constituted independent charitable activities. The court rejected the argument that the trust was partly public, emphasizing that the feeding of the poor was integral to the deity worship and not a standalone public charity. This determination influenced the subsequent analysis of the case.3. Consent of Assistant Shebaits: The requirement of the consent of all assistant shebaits for the election of a shebait was a critical aspect of the judgment. In the case of a private trust with multiple trustees, the law mandated that all trustees must participate in trust execution. Since all assistant shebaits did not participate in electing the shebait, the court held that the election of Jagannath as shebait was invalid. Consequently, the court set aside the judgments and decrees in both suits and directed the framing of a scheme for worship and charitable activities in line with the founder's intentions.In conclusion, the judgment clarified the interpretation of key terms in the deed of endowment, determined the nature of the trust, and emphasized the necessity of unanimous consent among assistant shebaits for significant decisions. The court's decision to set aside the previous judgments and establish a scheme for the appointment of shebaits aimed to uphold the founder's intentions and ensure the proper administration of the trust estate.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
