https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303719 A summary administrative enquiry under the Mysore Religious and Charitable Institutions Act, 1927 did not oust civil court jurisdiction over serious allegations of forgery, fraud, and diversion of trust property, because such disputes required regular civil trial and evidence; the suit under Section 92 CPC was therefore not barred. Once leave to sue had already been granted after contest, rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on the same objection was impermissible. After repeal of the Mysore Act, the suit remained maintainable under the procedural law then in force, and the trust was a necessary and proper party to a dispute concerning its management and property. en-us Thu, 27 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Aug 2022 10:58:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303719 A summary administrative enquiry under the Mysore Religious and Charitable Institutions Act, 1927 did not oust civil court jurisdiction over serious allegations of forgery, fraud, and diversion of trust property, because such disputes required regular civil trial and evidence; the suit under Section 92 CPC was therefore not barred. Once leave to sue had already been granted after contest, rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on the same objection was impermissible. After repeal of the Mysore Act, the suit remained maintainable under the procedural law then in force, and the trust was a necessary and proper party to a dispute concerning its management and property. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 27 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303719