1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION MISC. PETITION NO.1 OF 2008 Vinod Chandrakant Pitale & Ors. ...Petitioners Mr.D.D . Madan, Sr. Counsel i/b. M/s. Chitnis & Vaithy & Co., for Petitioners CORAM: SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED: 20 TH JUNE, 2008 P.C. 1. The Petitioners are Trustees of one Pandurang Balaji Trust under its agreement dated 20 th June, 1988. The property settled on Trust consists of a Hanuman temple and a dwelling house. The dwelling house is tenanted. 2. Under the Deed of Settlement dated 28 th June, 1988, the settlor inter alia settled a sum of Rs.4000/- on Trust for the maintenance of the trust under 4% Government Promissory Notes. The interest accruing therefrom was to be used for the maintenance of the Hanuman Temple. The amount of maintenance being insufficient, some promissory notes are stated to have been sold. The last of the Promissory Notes are stated to have been sold in 1942. For the last several 2 years the Trustees have been personally contributing to meet the expenses of the Trust. 3. The Petitioners have shown the expenses incurred by the Trust in the list Exhibit- D to the Petition. The Petitioners have produced for the perusal of the Court the original municipal assessment bills, repair cess bills, ground rent bills and the electricity bills. The Petitioners have shown other expenses which are usually incurred by such Trustees in the said list Exhibit- D. 4. The Petitioners desire to transfer the properties settled on trust as they find it difficult to maintain the trust assets from the income of the Trust. The Petitioners have produced a copy of the agreement dated 7th November, 2007 entered into by them as Trustees of the Trust with M/s. Earth Graphics, as the developers. It has to be seen that the said agreement is in the interest of the Trust. The Petitioners have agreed to entrust development rights, to sell and develop the trust property subject to a lease in respect of the temple and the land appurtenant thereto for Rs.21,00,000 /- . The tenancies are to be attorned to the developers. The Trustees are to pay outgoings up to 31 st March, 2007, after which the Developer took over that liability. 3 5. Upon the execution of the Deed of Conveyance the Developers would be executing a Perpetual Deed of Lease in respect of the portion covered by the Hanuman Temple at a yearly lease rent of Rs.1/- , and the Trust will be entitled to purchase the Reversionary Right on payment of Rs.501/- by the Trustees. The Trustees would be entitled to manage and maintain Hanuman temple. However, the Developer is shown to be entitled to develop the property inter alia in setting up “Jain Upasara” in what is stated to be the remaining part of the property by utilising a part of the F.S.I as would be available after rehabilitation of the tenants and occupants and after the repair or re-construction of the Hanuman temple. 6. It is seen that the development agreement is in the interest of the Trust provided that the Hanuman temple, which is the part of the trust premises, would continue to be on the part of the premises agreed to be conveyed to the Developers after its reconstruction or renovation. 7. Consequently leave is granted to the Petitioners to redevelop the property as per the development agreement dated 7 th November, 2007 Exhibit- D to the Petition provided that the Hanuman temple on the trust premises continues on the trust property as before. 4 8. The original documents produced by the Petitioners are returned to the Petitioners upon producing the xerox copies of the said documents. 9. The Petition is disposed of accordingly. (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI,J.)