Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948: ss. 88B and 32 – Exemption from certain provisions to land of local authorities, universities and trusts – On facts, land belonging to the temple let out to respondents – On 1.04.1957, Tillers’ Day the respondents-tenants in possession of the land became deemed purchasers – On 08.08.1984, the temple trust was registered after necessary inquiry – Thereafter, issuance of Exemption Certificate by the Collector in terms of s. 88B in favour of the Trust, notwithstanding the fact that the property belonged to “an institution of public religious worship” – Writ petition challenging the Exemption Certificate – Quashed by the High Court – On appeal, held: Section 88 B exempts the land being the property of a Trust, for inter alia public religious worship and/or educational and/or social purpose from the vesting provisions – Trust, being a public trust, was rightly registered on 8.8.1984, after due enquiry – Registration is prospective, w.e.f. 8.8.1984 – Respondents became deemed purchasers on Tillers’ Day-1.4.1957 – Right u/s. 32 accrued to the respondents on that day and it cannot be divested of such right upon subsequent registration of the Trust – Judgment passed by the High Court upheld.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD : 1.1 Section 88B of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 provides for exemption of land being the property of a Trust, for inter alia public religious worship and/or educational and/or social purpose from the vesting provisions. [Para 23] [399-F]
1.2 The Bombay Public Trusts Act is intended to regulate the administration of public religious and charitable trusts in the erstwhile State of Bombay, now the States of Maharashtra and Gujarat, creates for the first time a unified special organization to deal with charity matters. Trusts, long in existence, came to be regulated by the Public Trusts Act. The Mahants, pujaris etc. who administer properties of the deity as trustees, were brought within the ambit of the Public Trusts Act. [Para 28–30] [400-E-H; 401-A]
1.3 In view of the definition of ‘Public Trust’ in the Public Trusts Act, which also includes constructive trust either for a public religious or charitable purpose, the absence of a deed of trust would not make any difference to the position of the Trust as a “public trust”. [Para 32] [401-C-D]
1.4 A constructive trust arises by operation of law, without regard to the intention of the parties to create a trust. It does not require a deed signifying the institution of trust. Under a constructive trust, the trust arises by operation of law as from the date of the circumstances which give rise to it. The function of the court is only to declare that such a trust has arisen in the past. Constructive trust can arise over a wide range of situations. [Para 33–34] [401-E-F]
1.5 Section 90 of the Trusts Act states that if there is a person in a fiduciary relation to another, he cannot take advantage of that position so as to gain something exclusively for himself, which he otherwise would not have obtained, but for the position which he held. Section 94 of the Trusts Act, 1882 has allowed the creation of a constructive trust when situations went beyond the confines of the Act. Section 94 has later been repealed by the Benami Transactions Prohibitions Act, 1988. The repeal of Section 94 of the Act does not put any fetter in declaring a trust, even if the situation falls outside the purview of the Act. Its jurisdiction can be derived from Section 151 of CPC and Section
88 of the Indian Trusts Act. [Para 36, 37, 39] [402-E-F; 403-B]
1.6 There can be no doubt that the Trust was all along a public trust within the meaning of Section 2(13) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act. The Trust has rightly been registered under the Public Trusts Act, after due enquiry. However, all public trusts are not entitled, as of right, to the exemption under Section 88B of the 1948 Act. The said section only applies to lands which are property of a trust inter alia for educational purpose or for public religious purpose provided such trust is deemed to be registered or is registered under the Public Trusts Act. Only those Trusts which were registered under the enactments specified in Schedule A and Schedule AA are to be deemed to have been registered under the Public Trusts Act. There is no other provision in the Public Trusts Act with regard to deemed registration. If it were the intention of the legislature that all public trusts should be deemed to have been registered under the State Public Trusts Act, the legislature would have made an express provision to that effect. It is not for the Court to read into statute words and/or expressions which are not there in the statute. [Para 40, 42, 43] [403-C-D; 404-C-E]
1.7 The Trust, being a public trust, has rightly been registered on 8.8.1984, after due enquiry. The registration of the Trust under the Public Trusts Act cannot be questioned. However, the registration is prospective, w.e.f. 8.8.1984. The respondents became deemed purchasers on Tillers’ Day, that is, 1.4.1957. The right under Section 32 of the 1948 Act accrued to the respondents on that day. The respondents cannot be divested of such right upon subsequent registration of the Trust. It may be true that a Trust for a religious purpose has the right to own and acquire property. However, such property may be taken away by authority of law. The validity of Section 32 of the Public Trusts Act is not in question. The judgment and order passed by the High Court is upheld [Para 47, 48] [405-D-E]
Laxminarayan Temple v. L. M. Chandore AIR 1970 Bom
23 ; Chhatrapati Charitable Devasthan Trust v. Parisa Appa Bhoske and others 1979 Mh.L.J. 163 ; Gopal L. Raheja v. Vijay B. Raheja 2007 (4) Bom CR 288
– referred to.
Mahant Ramswarup Guru Chhote Balakdas v. Motiram Khandu Patil and Others AIR 1968 SC 422 : [1968] SCR 641 – distinguished.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.