Kishor Kirtilal Mehta & Ors vs Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust & ...

3. The suit out of which these appeals arise is one filed by Mrs. Charu Kishor Mehta, the appellant, in the two appeals arising out of Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal - CC Nos. 5818 and 5819 of 2007. The dispute relates to the administration of a trust named Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust governed by The Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. The suit challenged a notice dated 27.4.2006 issued for convening a meeting of the trustees on 29.4.2006 to resolve certain disputes and sought a declaration that the resolution allegedly adopted by that meeting was illegal and void and other incidental reliefs. By an order of this Court dated 26.3.2007 in Civil Appeal No. 1575 of 2007, the suit was directed to be taken up and disposed of as expeditiously as possible and at least within a period of six months from that date. An interim arrangement was also made by that order. It is the common case that pursuant to the direction of this Court, the trial has commenced, the plaintiff examined in part, and her examination remains incomplete, to be continued later. As of now, a witness for the plaintiff is being examined. It is also submitted that as per the direction of this Court, the suit has to be disposed of before 26.9.2007.

4. Defendant No. 11 in the suit is the husband of the plaintiff and defendants 12 and 13 are their children. They were impleaded by way of an amendment of the plaint. Defendant No. 11 filed a written statement supporting the case of the plaintiff. Defendants 12 and 13 filed a joint written statement. They also essentially supported the plaintiff. According to the contesting defendants, the written statements filed, sought to introduce averments not germane to the plaint and seeking to widen the scope of the controversy. They therefore filed an application seeking to have such pleadings in the two written statements struck out. Defendants 11 to 13 opposed that prayer. The trial court passed an order dated 30.4.2007 striking out paragraphs 4 to 31, 35 and 36 of the written statement of defendant No. 11 and paragraphs 4, 7, 11 and 12 from the joint written statement of defendants 12 and 13. Feeling aggrieved, defendants 11 to 13 filed W.P. No. 4407 of 2007 before the High Court purporting to invoke Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the said order. While the High Court issued notice on the Writ Petition returnable by 20.7.2007, it refused to stay the suit or the operation of the order dated 30.4.2007. It is this refusal to grant an interim order of stay that is impugned in SLP (C) No. 10954 of 2007.

5. Meanwhile, the plaintiff filed an affidavit in lieu of her chief-examination in terms of Order XVIII Rule 4 of the Code. The contesting defendants filed an application for striking out that part of the evidence in the affidavit, which, according to them, travelled outside the pleadings in the plaint. The plaintiff filed an objection to that application. By order dated 13.6.2007, the trial court accepted the plea of the contesting defendants and struck out paragraphs 11, 21 to 25, 27 and 29 in the affidavit of examination-in-chief filed by the plaintiff. Feeling aggrieved by that order, the plaintiff filed W.P. No. 4698 of 2007 invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order of the trial court. Though the High Court admitted the Writ Petition and issued notice returnable on 20.7.2007, it declined to grant a stay of trial of the suit or of the operation of the order dated 13.6.2007. Feeling aggrieved by the refusal of the High Court to grant an interim order pending disposal of the Writ Petition, the plaintiff has come up to this Court by way of Petition for Special Leave to Appeal arising out of CC No. 5818 of 2007.

6. The plaintiff, confronted with the order dated 13.6.2007 striking out a portion of her affidavit evidence in chief-examination, moved an application for amendment of the plaint. By the proposed amendment, she sought to add paragraphs 3(a), 3(b) as also paragraphs 7(a)(i) and 7(a)(ii) to the plaint. The contesting defendants opposed that application on various grounds. The trial court, by order dated 16.6.2007, dismissed the application. Challenging the said order, the plaintiff filed W.P. No. 4697 of 2007 in the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The High Court while admitting the said Writ Petition and issuing notice returnable by 20.7.2007, declined to stay the suit or the operation of the order dated 16.6.2007. This declining to grant stay is challenged in the Petition for Special Leave to Appeal arising out of CC No. 5819 of 2007.

13. At the same time, we think it necessary to clarify that the trial of the suit will go on and there will be no impediment to it. We find that the High Court has posted the matter on 20.7.2007 and all parties agreed before us that they will be ready to argue the matter that day. We request the High Court to ensure that the writ petitions covering such simple issues, be taken up on 20.7.2007 itself and disposed of in accordance with law immediately.

14. The orders of the High Court are thus slightly modified and the appeals are disposed of with the above direction. The parties are directed to suffer their respective costs.