Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a suit under section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 lay for framing a scheme and other reliefs in relation to a public charitable trust when the managing body was registered under the Indian Companies Act, and whether the company court alone had jurisdiction.
Analysis: Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 confers jurisdiction in matters concerning public and religious charities for protection of the trust and for reliefs such as framing a scheme. The remedy under the company law provisions relied upon is confined to members of the association and concerns their private rights in cases of mismanagement. The fact that the trustee or managing body is a company registered under section 26 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 does not exclude the application of section 92 where the beneficiaries complain of breach of trust or seek directions for proper administration. There is no distinction in this context between a trustee who is an individual and a trustee who is a company formed to execute the trust.
Conclusion: The suit under section 92 was maintainable and the civil court had jurisdiction; the company court was not the exclusive forum.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a public charitable trust is involved, section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 applies notwithstanding that the managing trustee is a company, and company law remedies do not oust the civil court's jurisdiction for trust administration reliefs.