Skip to content


Nanu Narayen Kothare Vs. the Advocate General of Bombay - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberSuit No. 21 of 1907
Judge
Reported in(1907)9BOMLR370
AppellantNanu Narayen Kothare
RespondentThe Advocate General of Bombay
Excerpt:
.....is very desirable. i assume, having regard to the position of the plaintiff and the assent of the advocate-general, that the proposals made in the plaint are under the present circumstances the best that could be suggested. this question i answer also in the affirmative and authorize the purchase of a house at an outlay of one lac of rupees for the benefit of the poor members of the cutchi lohana caste......that could be suggested.5. i accordingly accord my sanction to the various schemes proposed in the plaint and answer the questions in the summons as follows:-question i. i answer this question in the affirmative and sanction the proposed sale of the whole of the colaba property.question ii. i answer this question also in the affirmative and sanction the proposed purchase of the property at dadysett's agiary street-the erection of the temple-and the investment of two lacs of rupees in government paper for the purposes of the neck sewa of the thakoreji.question iii. this question i answer also in the affirmative and authorize the purchase of a house at an outlay of one lac of rupees for the benefit of the poor members of the cutchi lohana caste. it should be settled in trust as proposed,.....
Judgment:

Davar, J.

1. This is an Originating Summons taken out by Mr. Nanu Narayan Kothare, the sole surviving executor of and trustee under the will of, the late Chanda Ramji against the Advocate-General of Bombay wherein he prays for sanction of the Court to divert a portion of the residue of the estate dedicated under the will of his testator to the 'Nek Sewa' of the Thakorji to more useful charitable purposes as he finds that the residue is far larger than is necessary for the efficient performance of the 'Neok Sewa.' He also asks for sanction to certain other proposals for the sale and purchase of property more fully set out in the plaint.

2. On the argument of the summons the Advocate-General appeared before me in person and he signified to me his approval of all the proposals made in the plaint and did not suggest any modifications. Since the matter was argued before me I have had the decree in the previous suit, referred to in the course of the argument, placed before me. That decree is a consolidated decree in two suits, viz. suit No., 261 of 1896 andNo. 439 of 1897. The question as to whether a bequest to an idol is valid or not in Bombay is for the purpose of the present suit at all events set at rest by a declaration in that decree that ' the residuary devise to the Thakorji contained in the said will is a good and valid bequest in law.'

3. The Advocate-General seems to have considered the question of a possibility of escheat to Government and he has not considered it necessary to make any application to me to make the Secretary of State party to the suit.

4. The proposals made in the plaint appear to me to be prudent and well considered and I agree with the views expressed by counsel that the proposed diversion of the surplus funds of the residuary estate towards other charities is very desirable. I assume, having regard to the position of the plaintiff and the assent of the Advocate-General, that the proposals made in the plaint are under the present circumstances the best that could be suggested.

5. I accordingly accord my sanction to the various schemes proposed in the plaint and answer the questions in the summons as follows:-

Question I. I answer this question in the affirmative and sanction the proposed sale of the whole of the Colaba property.

Question II. I answer this question also in the affirmative and sanction the proposed purchase of the property at Dadysett's Agiary Street-the erection of the Temple-and the investment of two lacs of rupees in Government Paper for the purposes of the Neck Sewa of the Thakoreji.

Question III. This question I answer also in the affirmative and authorize the purchase of a house at an outlay of one lac of rupees for the benefit of the poor members of the Cutchi Lohana Caste. It should be settled in trust as proposed, the deed of settlement must however be submitted to and approved by the Honourable the Advocate-General of Bombay.

Question IV. In the affirmative. The plaintiff may contribute Rs. 10,000 to the fund for establishing a charitable dispensary for the Cutchi Lohana community.

Question V. I sanction the expenditure of between three and three and a half lacs of rupees for the establishment in Bombay of a Female High School for all Hindu girls. The appointment of the members of the first Managing Committee of the School must be subject to the approval of the Advocate-General and the Rules and Regulations for the management of the school must be submitted to the Advocate-General and approved of by him before they are put in force.

Question VI. The plaintiff may pay to Goswami Shri Raman Lalji Maharaj of Muttra the sum of Rs. 1717-14-11 mentioned in this question.

6. The costs of this suit of the plaintiff' and of the Advocate General, if any, taxed between attorney and client to be paid out of the estate of Chanda Ramji.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //