Decided on Samunder Singh and Others Samunder Singh and Others v. Mahendra Narendra Charitable Mahendra Narendra Charitable Education Trust
Case Details
(O&M) CR-7899-2025 (O&M) -1- - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH -.- CR CR-7899-2025 (O&M) Decided on:- 05.12.2025 Decided on Samunder Singh and Others Samunder Singh and Others ....Petitioner VERSUS Mahendra Narendra Charitable Mahendra Narendra Charitable Education Trust (Regd.) and Others Education Trust (Regd.) and Others ....Respondents MANDEEP PANNU CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU CORAM : HON'BLE M Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Sr. Advocate with Present: Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sahil Nehra, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sahil Nehra, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sahil Nehra, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ravinder Singh Randhawa, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ravinder Singh Randhawa, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ravinder Singh Randhawa, Sr. Advocate with and Ms. Tarranum Madan, Advocates Mr. K.S.Riar and Ms. Tarranum Madan, Advocates Mr. for respondents No.1 to 3. for respondents No.1 to 3. MANDEEP PANNU J. MANDEEP PANNU CII of 2025 CM-22482-CII of 2025 -.- This is an application for placing on record the amended memo of This is an application for placing on record the amended memo of This is an application for placing on record the amended memo of This is an application for placing on record the amended memo of parties. It is stated in para No.2 of the application that due to typographical It is stated in para No.2 of the application that due to typographical It is stated in para No.2 of the application that due to typographical It is stated in para No.2 of the application that due to typographical error, defendant No.10 could not be impleaded as a party to the petition. Therefore, error, defendant No.10 could not be impleaded as a party to the petition. Therefore, error, defendant No.10 could not be impleaded as a party to the petition. Therefore, error, defendant No.10 could not be impleaded as a party to the petition. Therefore, the petitioners intend to make defendant No.10 as performa respondent No.5 by the petitioners intend to make defendant No.10 as performa respondent No.5 by the petitioners intend to make defendant No.10 as performa respondent No.5 by the petitioners intend to make defendant No.10 as performa respondent No.5 by way of the present application. way of the present app For the reasons stated in the applications and in view of the For the reasons stated in the applications and in view of the For the reasons stated in the applications and in view of the For the reasons stated in the applications and in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the application is submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the application is submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the application is submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the application is Virender s/o Rishal Singh is impleaded as allowed and defendant No.10 – Virender s/o Rishal Singh is impleaded as Virender s/o Rishal Singh is impleaded as allowed and defendant No.10 ct to all just exceptions. Amended memo of performa respondent No.5, subject to all just exceptions. Amended memo of ct to all just exceptions. Amended memo of performa respondent No.5, subje parties is taken on record. parties is taken on record. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.12.08 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-7899-2025 (O&M) 2025 (O&M) CR-7899-2025 (O&M) -2- - 1. The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed by Samunder Singh The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed by Samunder Singh The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed by Samunder Singh The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed by Samunder Singh
Facts
(defendant No.1), Sukhvinder @ Sukhminder Singh (defendant No.1), Sukhvinder @ Sukhminder Singh (defendant No.1), Sukhvinder @ Sukhminder Singh (defendant No.1), Sukhvinder @ Sukhminder Singh (defendant No.2), (defendant No.2), (defendant No.2), (defendant No.2), Satvinder son of Late Sh. Raghuvinder (defendant No.4), Geeta (defendant No.5), Satvinder son of Late Sh. Raghuvinder (defendant No.4), Geeta (defendant No.5), Raghuvinder (defendant No.4), Geeta (defendant No.5), defendant No.7), Ravinder (defendant Sarup Narayana (defendant No.6), Urmila (defendant No.7), Ravinder (defendant defendant No.7), Ravinder (defendant Sarup Narayana No.8) and Tripta (defendant No.9) in the civil suit titled Mahendra Narendra No.8) and Tripta (defendant No.9) in the civil suit titled Mahendra Narendra No.8) and Tripta (defendant No.9) in the civil suit titled Mahendra Narendra No.8) and Tripta (defendant No.9) in the civil suit titled Mahendra Narendra Charitable Education Trust registered and others versus Samunder Singh and Charitable Education Trust registered and others versus Samunder Singh and Charitable Education Trust registered and others versus Samunder Singh and Charitable Education Trust registered and others versus Samunder Singh and render s/o others. Defendants No.3 (Sanjana wife of Sukhvinder) and No. 10 (Virender s/o others. Defendants No.3 (Sanjana wife of Sukhvinder) and others. Defendants No.3 (Sanjana wife of Sukhvinder) and have been impleaded as proforma respondents in the present revision Rishal Singh) have been impleaded as proforma respondents in the present revision have been impleaded as proforma respondents in the present revision have been impleaded as proforma respondents in the present revision petition. Brief Facts 2. The case of the plaintiffs, as set out in the plaint, is that Plaintiff No.1 The case of the plaintiffs, as set out in the plaint, is that Plaintiff No.1 The case of the plaintiffs, as set out in the plaint, is that Plaintiff No.1 The case of the plaintiffs, as set out in the plaint, is that Plaintiff No.1 dra Narendra Charitable is a registered charitable educational trust known as Mahendra Narendra Charitable is a registered charitable educational trust known as Mahen is a registered charitable educational trust known as Mahen Education Trust (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trust’) Education Trust , constituted through a (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trust’), constituted through a registered trust deed dated 27.11.1998. Plaintiff No.2 is presently the Chairman of registered trust deed dated 27.11.1998. Plaintiff No.2 is presently the Chairman of registered trust deed dated 27.11.1998. Plaintiff No.2 is presently the Chairman of registered trust deed dated 27.11.1998. Plaintiff No.2 is presently the Chairman of of the trust the Trust, having automatically assumed the position under the terms of the trust the Trust, having automatically assumed the position under the terms the Trust, having automatically assumed the position under the terms deed upon the death of the founder Chairman, Sh. Narender Singh Nandal, on deed upon the death of the founder Chairman, Sh. Narender Singh Nandal, on deed upon the death of the founder Chairman, Sh. Narender Singh Nandal, on deed upon the death of the founder Chairman, Sh. Narender Singh Nandal, on 06.06.2024. Plaintiff No.3 is the Secretary of the Trust. It is pleaded that Plaintiff 06.06.2024. Plaintiff No.3 is the Secretary of the Trust. It is pleaded that Plaintiff 06.06.2024. Plaintiff No.3 is the Secretary of the Trust. It is pleaded that Plaintiff 06.06.2024. Plaintiff No.3 is the Secretary of the Trust. It is pleaded that Plaintiff No.2 was brought up and educated by Sh. Narender Singh Nandal and his wife No.2 was brought up and educated by Sh. Narender Singh Nandal and his wife No.2 was brought up and educated by Sh. Narender Singh Nandal and his wife No.2 was brought up and educated by Sh. Narender Singh Nandal and his wife
Legal Reasoning
settled principles, prima facie case, balance of convenience, itself to the three well-settled principles, prima facie case, balance of convenience, settled principles, prima facie case, balance of convenience, itself to the three well and irreparable loss, has engaged in detailed factual findings which, in effect, and irreparable loss, has engaged in detailed factual findings which, in effect, and irreparable loss, has engaged in detailed factual findings which, in effect, and irreparable loss, has engaged in detailed factual findings which, in effect, trial adjudication of the core merits. Such an approach is amount to a pre-trial adjudication of the core merits. Such an approach is trial adjudication of the core merits. Such an approach is amount to a pre impermissible. 24. n the other hand, the Trial Court confined itself to examining On the other hand, the Trial Court confined itself to examining n the other hand, the Trial Court confined itself to examining n the other hand, the Trial Court confined itself to examining whether the plaintiffs had been able to show a prima facie right and prima facie whether the plaintiffs had been able to show a prima facie right and prima facie whether the plaintiffs had been able to show a prima facie right and prima facie whether the plaintiffs had been able to show a prima facie right and prima facie possession over the suit property at the time of filing of the suit. Finding that both possession over the suit property at the time of filing of the suit. Finding that both possession over the suit property at the time of filing of the suit. Finding that both possession over the suit property at the time of filing of the suit. Finding that both se essential ingredients were doubtful due to the disputed nature of the these essential ingredients were doubtful due to the disputed nature of the se essential ingredients were doubtful due to the disputed nature of the se essential ingredients were doubtful due to the disputed nature of the foundational resolution of 20.06.2023, lack of recent documents supporting foundational resolution of 20.06.2023, lack of recent documents supporting foundational resolution of 20.06.2023, lack of recent documents supporting foundational resolution of 20.06.2023, lack of recent documents supporting plaintiffs’ management, presence of recent salary slips produced by defendants and plaintiffs’ management, presence of recent salary slips produced by defendants and plaintiffs’ management, presence of recent salary slips produced by defendants and plaintiffs’ management, presence of recent salary slips produced by defendants and mplaints relating to alleged interference and attempted complaints and counter-complaints relating to alleged interference and attempted mplaints relating to alleged interference and attempted complaints and counter forcible occupation, the Trial Court rightly concluded that no prima facie case was forcible occupation, the Trial Court rightly concluded that no prima facie case was forcible occupation, the Trial Court rightly concluded that no prima facie case was forcible occupation, the Trial Court rightly concluded that no prima facie case was made out in favour of the plaintiffs and hence the injunction could not be granted. made out in favour of the plaintiffs and hence the injunction could not be granted. made out in favour of the plaintiffs and hence the injunction could not be granted. made out in favour of the plaintiffs and hence the injunction could not be granted. 25. the Lower Appellate Court did not deal This Court also notes that the Lower Appellate Court did not deal the Lower Appellate Court did not deal This Court also notes that with or controvert the Trial Court’s reasoning on absence of recent salary slips, nor with or controvert the Trial Court’s reasoning on absence of recent salary slips, nor with or controvert the Trial Court’s reasoning on absence of recent salary slips, nor with or controvert the Trial Court’s reasoning on absence of recent salary slips, nor did it address the suspicious nature of the impugned resolution pointed out by the did it address the suspicious nature of the impugned resolution pointed out by the did it address the suspicious nature of the impugned resolution pointed out by the did it address the suspicious nature of the impugned resolution pointed out by the tion that earlier resolutions and Trial Court. Instead, it proceeded on the assumption that earlier resolutions and Trial Court. Instead, it proceeded on the assump Trial Court. Instead, it proceeded on the assump earlier documents automatically confer present entitlement to injunction, an earlier documents automatically confer present entitlement to injunction, an earlier documents automatically confer present entitlement to injunction, an earlier documents automatically confer present entitlement to injunction, an assumption that is neither supported by law nor by the nature of interim assumption that is neither supported by law nor by the nature of interim assumption that is neither supported by law nor by the nature of interim assumption that is neither supported by law nor by the nature of interim proceedings. 26. The The plaintiffs respondents/plaintiffs plaintiffs have have have vehemently vehemently vehemently argued argued argued that that that defendants no.1 to 9 are not the elected or nominated members of the appellants/defendants no.1 to 9 are not the elected or nominated members of the defendants no.1 to 9 are not the elected or nominated members of the defendants no.1 to 9 are not the elected or nominated members of the Trust and, therefore, are complete strangers having no locus standi to challenge the Trust and, therefore, are complete strangers having no locus standi to challenge the Trust and, therefore, are complete strangers having no locus standi to challenge the Trust and, therefore, are complete strangers having no locus standi to challenge the authority of plaintiff no.2 or to dispute the management and possession of the Trust authority of plaintiff no.2 or to dispute the management and possession of the Trust authority of plaintiff no.2 or to dispute the management and possession of the Trust authority of plaintiff no.2 or to dispute the management and possession of the Trust TRIPTI SAINI 2025.12.08 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-7899-2025 (O&M) -11- - rty. It is further pointed out that the Trust itself is not arrayed as a defendant property. It is further pointed out that the Trust itself is not arrayed as a defendant rty. It is further pointed out that the Trust itself is not arrayed as a defendant rty. It is further pointed out that the Trust itself is not arrayed as a defendant through any authorised representative and, consequently, the answering defendants through any authorised representative and, consequently, the answering defendants through any authorised representative and, consequently, the answering defendants through any authorised representative and, consequently, the answering defendants cannot claim any right in the suit property. cannot claim any right in the suit property. 27. age, cannot be accepted for This contention, at this interlocutory stage, cannot be accepted for This contention, at this interlocutory st This contention, at this interlocutory st , the nature and extent of the defendants’ relationship more than one reason. Firstly, the nature and extent of the defendants’ relationship , the nature and extent of the defendants’ relationship more than one reason. with the Trust is itself a disputed question of fact, as reflected from the pleadings with the Trust is itself a disputed question of fact, as reflected from the pleadings with the Trust is itself a disputed question of fact, as reflected from the pleadings with the Trust is itself a disputed question of fact, as reflected from the pleadings t they are founder and documents on record. The defendants have asserted that they are founder and documents on record. The defendants have asserted tha and documents on record. The defendants have asserted tha family members, life members, and persons who have been running the school family members, life members, and persons who have been running the school family members, life members, and persons who have been running the school family members, life members, and persons who have been running the school since long, and have also produced recent salary slips of the staff. Whether this since long, and have also produced recent salary slips of the staff. Whether this since long, and have also produced recent salary slips of the staff. Whether this since long, and have also produced recent salary slips of the staff. Whether this led. claim is valid or not is a matter that can only be adjudicated after evidence is led. claim is valid or not is a matter that can only be adjudicated after evidence is claim is valid or not is a matter that can only be adjudicated after evidence is Therefore, the question of ‘locus standi’ itself is intertwined with the very issues in Therefore, the question of ‘locus standi’ itself is intertwined with the very issues in Therefore, the question of ‘locus standi’ itself is intertwined with the very issues in Therefore, the question of ‘locus standi’ itself is intertwined with the very issues in dispute and cannot be conclusively determined at the stage of deciding an dispute and cannot be conclusively determined at the stage of deciding an dispute and cannot be conclusively determined at the stage of deciding an dispute and cannot be conclusively determined at the stage of deciding an , even assuming for the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC. Secondly, even assuming for the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC. application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC. gument that defendants no.1 to 9 have not been able to fully establish sake of argument that defendants no.1 to 9 have not been able to fully establish gument that defendants no.1 to 9 have not been able to fully establish gument that defendants no.1 to 9 have not been able to fully establish their authority or membership of the Trust at this stage, the law is well settled that their authority or membership of the Trust at this stage, the law is well settled that their authority or membership of the Trust at this stage, the law is well settled that their authority or membership of the Trust at this stage, the law is well settled that the plaintiff must stand on his own legs. A temporary injunction cannot be granted the plaintiff must stand on his own legs. A temporary injunction cannot be granted the plaintiff must stand on his own legs. A temporary injunction cannot be granted the plaintiff must stand on his own legs. A temporary injunction cannot be granted the defendant has not shown a better right. The burden lies merely because the defendant has not shown a better right. The burden lies the defendant has not shown a better right. The burden lies merely because squarely on the plaintiffs to prima facie establish that plaintiff no.2 validly became squarely on the plaintiffs to prima facie establish that plaintiff no.2 validly became squarely on the plaintiffs to prima facie establish that plaintiff no.2 validly became squarely on the plaintiffs to prima facie establish that plaintiff no.2 validly became Chairperson/Chairperson of the Trust, that plaintiff no.1 Trust, under her the Vice-Chairperson/Chairperson of the Trust, that plaintiff no.1 Trust, under her Chairperson/Chairperson of the Trust, that plaintiff no.1 Trust, under her Chairperson/Chairperson of the Trust, that plaintiff no.1 Trust, under her possession of the school and that the plaintiffs, and not the leadership, is in settled possession of the school and that the plaintiffs, and not the possession of the school and that the plaintiffs, and not the leadership, is in settled defendants, are administering and controlling the institution on the date of the suit. defendants, are administering and controlling the institution on the date of the suit. defendants, are administering and controlling the institution on the date of the suit. defendants, are administering and controlling the institution on the date of the suit. 28. As already discussed, the very foundation of the plaintiffs’ claim, the As already discussed, the very foundation of the plaintiffs’ claim, the As already discussed, the very foundation of the plaintiffs’ claim, the As already discussed, the very foundation of the plaintiffs’ claim, the is seriously disputed, shows signs of manipulation on resolution dated 20.06.2023 is seriously disputed, shows signs of manipulation on is seriously disputed, shows signs of manipulation on resolution dated 20.06.2023 fledged evidence. Further, no recent salary the face of the record, and requires full-fledged evidence. Further, no recent salary fledged evidence. Further, no recent salary the face of the record, and requires full slips or contemporary documents establishing plaintiffs’ administration of the slips or contemporary documents establishing plaintiffs’ administration of the slips or contemporary documents establishing plaintiffs’ administration of the slips or contemporary documents establishing plaintiffs’ administration of the TRIPTI SAINI 2025.12.08 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-7899-2025 (O&M) -12- - e of such prima facie material, the plaintiffs school have been filed. In the absence of such prima facie material, the plaintiffs e of such prima facie material, the plaintiffs school have been filed. In the absenc cannot derive any advantage merely by asserting that defendants have no locus. cannot derive any advantage merely by asserting that defendants have no locus. cannot derive any advantage merely by asserting that defendants have no locus. 29. In conclusion, the plaintiffs have failed to establish a prima facie right In conclusion, the plaintiffs have failed to establish a prima facie right In conclusion, the plaintiffs have failed to establish a prima facie right In conclusion, the plaintiffs have failed to establish a prima facie right the revision in their favour, irrespective of the defendants’ position. Consequently, the revision in their favour, irrespective of the defendants’ p in their favour, irrespective of the defendants’ p . Impugned order dated 16.10.2025 passed by the petition is hereby accepted. Impugned order dated 16.10.2025 passed by the . Impugned order dated 16.10.2025 passed by the petition is hereby accepted learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak is set aside. learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak is set aside. learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak is set aside. 30.
Arguments
Mahender Kaur, who treated her as their daughter, and accordingly she was Smt. Mahender Kaur, who treated her as their daughter, and accordingly she was Mahender Kaur, who treated her as their daughter, and accordingly she was Mahender Kaur, who treated her as their daughter, and accordingly she was Chairman of the Trust during their lifetime. nominated as Vice-Chairman of the Trust during their lifetime. nominated as Vice 3. It is further averred that Plaintiff No.1 has been constituted to run and It is further averred that Plaintiff No.1 has been constituted to run and It is further averred that Plaintiff No.1 has been constituted to run and It is further averred that Plaintiff No.1 has been constituted to run and tions and, in furtherance of these manage charitable and educational institutions and, in furtherance of these tions and, in furtherance of these manage charitable and educational institu objectives, various parcels of land were leased and gifted to the Trust over several objectives, various parcels of land were leased and gifted to the Trust over several objectives, various parcels of land were leased and gifted to the Trust over several objectives, various parcels of land were leased and gifted to the Trust over several years. Lease deeds dated 15.02.1999, 17.09.2004 and symbolic possession years. Lease deeds dated 15.02.1999, 17.09.2004 and symbolic possession years. Lease deeds dated 15.02.1999, 17.09.2004 and symbolic possession years. Lease deeds dated 15.02.1999, 17.09.2004 and symbolic possession TRIPTI SAINI 2025.12.08 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-7899-2025 (O&M) -3- - executed by delivered on 14.05.2008, as well as a gift deed dated 14.05.2008 executed by delivered on 14.05.2008, as well as a gift deed dated 14.05.2008 delivered on 14.05.2008, as well as a gift deed dated 14.05.2008 Virender Singh, were relied upon to show that the Trust came into lawful Virender Singh, were relied upon to show that the Trust came into lawful Virender Singh, were relied upon to show that the Trust came into lawful Virender Singh, were relied upon to show that the Trust came into lawful possession of approximately 40 Kanal 13 Marla of land situated within the revenue possession of approximately 40 Kanal 13 Marla of land situated within the revenue possession of approximately 40 Kanal 13 Marla of land situated within the revenue possession of approximately 40 Kanal 13 Marla of land situated within the revenue estate of village Kutana, Tehsil and District Rohtak. Over this land, Plaintiff No.1 estate of village Kutana, Tehsil and District Rohtak. Over this land, Plaintiff No.1 estate of village Kutana, Tehsil and District Rohtak. Over this land, Plaintiff No.1 estate of village Kutana, Tehsil and District Rohtak. Over this land, Plaintiff No.1 structed a school building comprising classrooms, hall, storerooms, bathrooms, constructed a school building comprising classrooms, hall, storerooms, bathrooms, structed a school building comprising classrooms, hall, storerooms, bathrooms, structed a school building comprising classrooms, hall, storerooms, bathrooms, open yard and boundary wall with gates, and has been running Mahendra Narendra open yard and boundary wall with gates, and has been running Mahendra Narendra open yard and boundary wall with gates, and has been running Mahendra Narendra open yard and boundary wall with gates, and has been running Mahendra Narendra Adarsh Senior Secondary School therein. Adarsh Senior Secondary School therein. 4. cognised by The plaintiffs assert that the school has been duly recognised by The plaintiffs assert that the school has been duly re The plaintiffs assert that the school has been duly re competent educational authorities since 1999 and thereafter granted permanent competent educational authorities since 1999 and thereafter granted permanent competent educational authorities since 1999 and thereafter granted permanent competent educational authorities since 1999 and thereafter granted permanent recognition up to Class 12. The Trust operates a functional bank account, submits recognition up to Class 12. The Trust operates a functional bank account, submits recognition up to Class 12. The Trust operates a functional bank account, submits recognition up to Class 12. The Trust operates a functional bank account, submits income tax returns, and conducts all financial and administrative affairs in income tax returns, and conducts all financial and administrative affairs in income tax returns, and conducts all financial and administrative affairs in income tax returns, and conducts all financial and administrative affairs in nce with the trust deed. Various resolutions passed by the Trust, copies of accordance with the trust deed. Various resolutions passed by the Trust, copies of nce with the trust deed. Various resolutions passed by the Trust, copies of nce with the trust deed. Various resolutions passed by the Trust, copies of financial documents, and other annexures are relied upon to demonstrate lawful financial documents, and other annexures are relied upon to demonstrate lawful financial documents, and other annexures are relied upon to demonstrate lawful financial documents, and other annexures are relied upon to demonstrate lawful management and continuous possession. management and continuous possession. 5. members ccording to the plaintiffs, the defendants, who are family members ccording to the plaintiffs, the defendants, who are family According to the plaintiffs, the defendants, who are family sharers of the erstwhile landowners have recently developed mala fide and co-sharers of the erstwhile landowners have recently developed mala fide sharers of the erstwhile landowners have recently developed mala fide sharers of the erstwhile landowners have recently developed mala fide intentions to disturb the peaceful possession of the Trust over the suit property. It intentions to disturb the peaceful possession of the Trust over the suit property. It intentions to disturb the peaceful possession of the Trust over the suit property. It intentions to disturb the peaceful possession of the Trust over the suit property. It is alleged that in July 2024, the defendants attempted to interfere in the functioning is alleged that in July 2024, the defendants attempted to interfere in the functioni is alleged that in July 2024, the defendants attempted to interfere in the functioni is alleged that in July 2024, the defendants attempted to interfere in the functioni of the school, forcibly entered the premises, took away records, manhandled of the school, forcibly entered the premises, took away records, manhandled of the school, forcibly entered the premises, took away records, manhandled of the school, forcibly entered the premises, took away records, manhandled Plaintiff No.2, and threatened to dispossess the Trust. Complaints were lodged Plaintiff No.2, and threatened to dispossess the Trust. Complaints were lodged Plaintiff No.2, and threatened to dispossess the Trust. Complaints were lodged Plaintiff No.2, and threatened to dispossess the Trust. Complaints were lodged with police and administrative authorities, but no action was taken. The plaintiffs with police and administrative authorities, but no action was taken. The plaintiffs with police and administrative authorities, but no action was taken. The plaintiffs with police and administrative authorities, but no action was taken. The plaintiffs e defendants have no right, title or interest in the school premises and assert that the defendants have no right, title or interest in the school premises and e defendants have no right, title or interest in the school premises and e defendants have no right, title or interest in the school premises and that they are estopped from interfering, having acquiesced to the construction and that they are estopped from interfering, having acquiesced to the construction and that they are estopped from interfering, having acquiesced to the construction and that they are estopped from interfering, having acquiesced to the construction and functioning of the school for many years. functioning of the school for many years. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.12.08 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-7899-2025 (O&M) -4- - 6. of the defendants The plaintiffs plead that unless restrained, the acts of the defendants The plaintiffs plead that unless restrained, the acts The plaintiffs plead that unless restrained, the acts will cause irreparable injury to the administration of the Trust and to the will cause irreparable injury to the administration of the Trust and to the will cause irreparable injury to the administration of the Trust and to the will cause irreparable injury to the administration of the Trust and to the functioning of the school. Hence, the suit for permanent injunction was filed along functioning of the school. Hence, the suit for permanent injunction was filed along functioning of the school. Hence, the suit for permanent injunction was filed along functioning of the school. Hence, the suit for permanent injunction was filed along with the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC seeking interim protection. with the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC seeking interim protectio with the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC seeking interim protectio with the application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC seeking interim protectio 7. In the written statement filed on behalf of defendants No.1 to 9, i In the written statement filed on behalf of defendants No.1 to 9, In the written statement filed on behalf of defendants No.1 to 9, it is pleaded that the present suit for permanent injunction is not maintainable in its pleaded that the present suit for permanent injunction is not maintainable in its pleaded that the present suit for permanent injunction is not maintainable in its pleaded that the present suit for permanent injunction is not maintainable in its present form, the plaintiff the plaintiffs have concealed material facts. Plaintiff No.2 is neither s have concealed material facts. Plaintiff No.2 is neither nor President of the Trust, and plaintiff No.3 is not its Secretary, and Chairman nor President of the Trust, and plaintiff No.3 is not its Secretary, and nor President of the Trust, and plaintiff No.3 is not its Secretary, and nor President of the Trust, and plaintiff No.3 is not its Secretary, and therefore the plaintiffs have no locus standi to file the present suit. It is further therefore the plaintiffs have no locus standi to file the present suit. It is further therefore the plaintiffs have no locus standi to file the present suit. It is further therefore the plaintiffs have no locus standi to file the present suit. It is further pleaded that no cause of action has arisen in favour of the plaintiffs, and the suit is pleaded that no cause of action has arisen in favour of the plaintiffs, and the suit is pleaded that no cause of action has arisen in favour of the plaintiffs, and the suit is pleaded that no cause of action has arisen in favour of the plaintiffs, and the suit is by Section 92 CPC. The defendants assert that they are running and also hit by Section 92 CPC. The defendants assert that they are running and by Section 92 CPC. The defendants assert that they are running and by Section 92 CPC. The defendants assert that they are running and managing the school for many years, and the plaintiffs are not in possession of the managing the school for many years, and the plaintiffs are not in possession of the managing the school for many years, and the plaintiffs are not in possession of the managing the school for many years, and the plaintiffs are not in possession of the school building or its affairs; hence, the suit for injunction does not lie. school building or its affairs; hence, the suit for injunction does not lie. school building or its affairs; hence, the suit for injunction does not lie. 8. s denied the claim that plaintiff No.2 On merits, the defendants denied the claim that plaintiff No.2 s denied the claim that plaintiff No.2 On merits, the defendant automatically became Chairman of the Trust after the demise of Shri Narender automatically became Chairman of the Trust after the demise of Shri Narender automatically became Chairman of the Trust after the demise of Shri Narender automatically became Chairman of the Trust after the demise of Shri Narender Singh Nandal. As per the defendants, it is defendant No.10 who is the Vice- Singh Nandal. As per the defendants, it is defendant No.10 who is the Vice Singh Nandal. As per the defendants, it is defendant No.10 who is the Vice Singh Nandal. As per the defendants, it is defendant No.10 who is the Vice the founder Chairman of the Trust and who became Chairman after the death of the founder Chairman of the Trust and who became Chairman after the death of Chairman of the Trust and who became Chairman after the death of Chairman. All alleged resolutions, proceedings and documents relied upon by the Chairman. All alleged resolutions, proceedings and documents relied upon by the Chairman. All alleged resolutions, proceedings and documents relied upon by the Chairman. All alleged resolutions, proceedings and documents relied upon by the plaintiffs such as those dated 29.04.2024, 09.05.2024, 08.06.2024 plaintiffs such as those dated .2024 29.04.2024, 09.05.2024, 08.06.2024 and 05.09.2024 are alleged to be false, fabricated and procured by the plaintiffs only to take con are alleged to be false, fabricated and procured by the plaintiffs only to take con are alleged to be false, fabricated and procured by the plaintiffs only to take con trol over the Trust property. It is further denied that plaintiff No.2 was ever treated as over the Trust property. It is further denied that plaintiff No.2 was ever treated as over the Trust property. It is further denied that plaintiff No.2 was ever treated as over the Trust property. It is further denied that plaintiff No.2 was ever treated as the daughter of late Sh. Narender Singh Nandal and his wife. The defendants also the daughter of late Sh. Narender Singh Nandal and his wife. The defendants also the daughter of late Sh. Narender Singh Nandal and his wife. The defendants also the daughter of late Sh. Narender Singh Nandal and his wife. The defendants also dispute the alleged membership and authority of plaintiff No.2 in the Trust, dispute the alleged membership and authority of plaintiff No.2 in the Trust, dispute the alleged membership and authority of plaintiff No.2 in the Trust, dispute the alleged membership and authority of plaintiff No.2 in the Trust, ng that the plaintiffs have no concern with the Trust and the proceedings asserting that the plaintiffs have no concern with the Trust and the proceedings ng that the plaintiffs have no concern with the Trust and the proceedings ng that the plaintiffs have no concern with the Trust and the proceedings mentioned by them are illegal and void. mentioned by them are illegal and void. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.12.08 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-7899-2025 (O&M) -5- - 9. The defendants further state that the school is being run and managed The defendants further state that the school is being run and managed The defendants further state that the school is being run and managed The defendants further state that the school is being run and managed interest of the by them since long, being the founder members and successors in interest of the by them since long, being the founder members and successors in by them since long, being the founder members and successors in owners. It is pleaded that the land continues to be joint and original land-owners. It is pleaded that the land continues to be joint and owners. It is pleaded that the land continues to be joint and owners. It is pleaded that the land continues to be joint and sharer having interest in every inch thereof, and that unpartitioned, with each co-sharer having interest in every inch thereof, and that sharer having interest in every inch thereof, and that unpartitioned, with each co intiff the plaintiffs’ claim of exclusive possession is false. They also allege that plaintiff the plaintiffs’ claim of exclusive possession is false. They also allege that pla the plaintiffs’ claim of exclusive possession is false. They also allege that pla No.2 forcibly attempted to take over the school premises on 22.07.2024 and, upon No.2 forcibly attempted to take over the school premises on 22.07.2024 and, upon No.2 forcibly attempted to take over the school premises on 22.07.2024 and, upon No.2 forcibly attempted to take over the school premises on 22.07.2024 and, upon objection, lodged false complaints. It is further pleaded that on 25.07.2024 plaintiff objection, lodged false complaints. It is further pleaded that on 25.07.2024 plaintiff objection, lodged false complaints. It is further pleaded that on 25.07.2024 plaintiff objection, lodged false complaints. It is further pleaded that on 25.07.2024 plaintiff No.2 stole the proceedings book and other records from the school building, for No.2 stole the proceedings book and other records from the school building, for No.2 stole the proceedings book and other records from the school building, for No.2 stole the proceedings book and other records from the school building, for hich complaint was made to the police. The defendants assert that all financial which complaint was made to the police. The defendants assert that all financial hich complaint was made to the police. The defendants assert that all financial hich complaint was made to the police. The defendants assert that all financial dealings, including the payment of staff salaries, have always been handled by dealings, including the payment of staff salaries, have always been handled by dealings, including the payment of staff salaries, have always been handled by dealings, including the payment of staff salaries, have always been handled by them after the death of the founder Chairman. them after the death of the founder Chairman. 10. endants submit that the In their additional written statement, the defendants submit that the In their additional written statement, the def In their additional written statement, the def plaintiffs, through the replication and newly filed documents, have introduced plaintiffs, through the replication and newly filed documents, have introduced plaintiffs, through the replication and newly filed documents, have introduced plaintiffs, through the replication and newly filed documents, have introduced manipulated and fabricated proceedings with the sole intention of grabbing the manipulated and fabricated proceedings with the sole intention of grabbing the manipulated and fabricated proceedings with the sole intention of grabbing the manipulated and fabricated proceedings with the sole intention of grabbing the 3, where Trust property. It is pleaded that the alleged proceedings dated 31.05.2023, where Trust property. It is pleaded that the alleged proceedings dated 31.05.202 Trust property. It is pleaded that the alleged proceedings dated 31.05.202 defendant No.10 was shown to have been appointed Chairman and thereafter defendant No.10 was shown to have been appointed Chairman and thereafter defendant No.10 was shown to have been appointed Chairman and thereafter defendant No.10 was shown to have been appointed Chairman and thereafter allegedly resigned within days, are false and manufactured by the plaintiffs. allegedly resigned within days, are false and manufactured by the plaintiffs. allegedly resigned within days, are false and manufactured by the plaintiffs. allegedly resigned within days, are false and manufactured by the plaintiffs. According to the defendants, any prudent person would conclude that such abrupt According to the defendants, any prudent person would conclude that such abrupt According to the defendants, any prudent person would conclude that such abrupt According to the defendants, any prudent person would conclude that such abrupt nherently suspicious and clearly indicative of fabrication. The resignation is inherently suspicious and clearly indicative of fabrication. The nherently suspicious and clearly indicative of fabrication. The resignation is i defendants rely upon affidavits of persons who allegedly attended said meetings to defendants rely upon affidavits of persons who allegedly attended said meetings to defendants rely upon affidavits of persons who allegedly attended said meetings to defendants rely upon affidavits of persons who allegedly attended said meetings to substantiate their plea that the documents produced by the plaintiffs are substantiate their plea that the documents produced by the plaintiffs are substantiate their plea that the documents produced by the plaintiffs are substantiate their plea that the documents produced by the plaintiffs are on with outsiders. manipulated and prepared in collusion with outsiders. manipulated and prepared in collusi 11. dismissal of the stay application. They therefore prayed dismissal of the stay application. They therefore pray TRIPTI SAINI 2025.12.08 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-7899-2025 (O&M) Findings of trial Court Findings of trial Court -6- - 12. he trial Court dismissed the application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 The trial Court dismissed the application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 he trial Court dismissed the application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 he trial Court dismissed the application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 filed by the plaintiff. The trial Court observed that & 2 read with Section 151 CPC filed by the plaintiff. The trial Court observed that filed by the plaintiff. The trial Court observed that & 2 read with Section 151 CPC resolution dated 20.06.2023 does not inspire confidence of the Court. The Court resolution dated 20.06.2023 does not inspire confidence of the Court. The Court resolution dated 20.06.2023 does not inspire confidence of the Court. The Court resolution dated 20.06.2023 does not inspire confidence of the Court. The Court found it suspicious due to inconsistencies such as use of different inks and found it suspicious due to inconsistencies such as use of different inks and found it suspicious due to inconsistencies such as use of different inks and found it suspicious due to inconsistencies such as use of different inks and city. Further, subsequent resolutions handwriting, which cast doubt on its authenticity. Further, subsequent resolutions city. Further, subsequent resolutions handwriting, which cast doubt on its authenti dated 29.04.2024, 09.05.2024, 08.06.2024, 05.09.2024, 10.11.2024 and 07.02.202 dated 29.04.2024, 09.05.2024, 08.06.2024, 05.09 dated 29.04.2024, 09.05.2024, 08.06.2024, 05.09 .2024, 10.11.2024 and 07.02.2025 When earlier resolution dated are dependent upon resolution dated 20.06.2023. When earlier resolution dated are dependent upon resolution dated 20.06.2023 are dependent upon resolution dated 20.06.2023 de plaintiff No.2 20.06.2023 is under challenge, no subsequent resolution, vide plaintiff No.2 20.06.2023 is under challenge, no subsequent resolution 20.06.2023 is under challenge, no subsequent resolution Further the trial Court observed that from become chairperson can be relied upon. Further the trial Court observed that from Further the trial Court observed that from become chairperson can be relied upon. 21, do the salary slips, which have been placed on record as Annexure P-20 and P-21, do the salary slips, which have been placed on record as Annexure P the salary slips, which have been placed on record as Annexure P intiff not show that plaintiff No.2 and 3 are running the school on behalf of plaintiff not show that plaintiff No.2 and 3 are running the sch not show that plaintiff No.2 and 3 are running the sch No.1. Rather the salary slips of the employees of the school from January 2025 to No.1. Rather the salary slips of the employees of the school from January 2025 to No.1. Rather the salary slips of the employees of the school from January 2025 to No.1. Rather the salary slips of the employees of the school from January 2025 to March 2025, placed on record by the defendants show that the defendants are March 2025, placed on record by the defendants show that the defendants are March 2025, placed on record by the defendants show that the defendants are March 2025, placed on record by the defendants show that the defendants are running the school. running the school. Findings of the lower appellate Court Findings of the lower appellate Court 13. Aggrieved by the order dated 06.05.2025 Aggrieved by the order , the plaintiffs filed an dated 06.05.2025, the plaintiffs filed an The appellate Court observed that Trust deed No.6903 dated 27.11.1998 appeal. The appellate Court observed that Trust deed No.6903 dated 27.11.1998 The appellate Court observed that Trust deed No.6903 dated 27.11.1998 The appellate Court observed that Trust deed No.6903 dated 27.11.1998 clearly provides that upon the death of the Chairman, the Vice Chairman shall clearly provides that upon the death of the Chairman, the Vice Chairman shall clearly provides that upon the death of the Chairman, the Vice Chairman shall clearly provides that upon the death of the Chairman, the Vice Chairman shall nomination. The automatically assume the office of Chairman until further nomination. The automatically assume the office of Chairman until further automatically assume the office of Chairman until further resolution dated 09.05.2024 shows that the founder Chairman, late Sh. Narender resolution dated 09.05.2024 shows that the founder Chairman, late Sh. Narender resolution dated 09.05.2024 shows that the founder Chairman, late Sh. Narender resolution dated 09.05.2024 shows that the founder Chairman, late Sh. Narender Singh Nandal had formally nominated plaintiff No.2 as Vice Chairman during his Singh Nandal had formally nominated plaintiff No.2 as Vice Chairman during his Singh Nandal had formally nominated plaintiff No.2 as Vice Chairman during his Singh Nandal had formally nominated plaintiff No.2 as Vice Chairman during his by any of the life time. The chairmanship of plaintiff No.2 was not challenged by any of the life time. The chairmanship of plaintiff No.2 was not challenged life time. The chairmanship of plaintiff No.2 was not challenged spondents. After perusal of record it acknowledged that plaintiff No.2 is respondents. After perusal of record it acknowledged that plaintiff No.2 is spondents. After perusal of record it acknowledged that plaintiff No.2 is spondents. After perusal of record it acknowledged that plaintiff No.2 is performing her duties as Chairman. Further, the trial Court did not appreciate the performing her duties as Chairman. Further, the trial Court did not appreciate the performing her duties as Chairman. Further, the trial Court did not appreciate the performing her duties as Chairman. Further, the trial Court did not appreciate the TRIPTI SAINI 2025.12.08 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-7899-2025 (O&M) -7- - legal effect of the registered trust deed dated 27.11.1998 and the statutory legal effect of the registered trust deed dated 27.11.1998 and the statutory legal effect of the registered trust deed dated 27.11.1998 and the statutory legal effect of the registered trust deed dated 27.11.1998 and the statutory presumption arising therefrom. presumption arising th 14. After hearing the arguments of both the sides and appreciating the After hearing the arguments of both the sides and appreciating the After hearing the arguments of both the sides and appreciating the After hearing the arguments of both the sides and appreciating the material on record, the appellate Court reversed the findings of the trial Court and material on record, the appellate Court reversed the findings of the trial Court and material on record, the appellate Court reversed the findings of the trial Court and material on record, the appellate Court reversed the findings of the trial Court and allowed the appeal. It restrained the defendants from interfering in the peaceful allowed the appeal. It restrained the defendants from interfering in the peaceful allowed the appeal. It restrained the defendants from interfering in the peaceful allowed the appeal. It restrained the defendants from interfering in the peaceful ion, management and administration of the Trust and school building possession, management and administration of the Trust and school building ion, management and administration of the Trust and school building ion, management and administration of the Trust and school building known as Manhendra Narender Adarsh Senior Secondary School. known as Manhendra Narender Adarsh Senior Secondary School. known as Manhendra Narender Adarsh Senior Secondary School. 15. Aggrieved by the order of the lower appellate Court, the defendants Aggrieved by the order of the lower appellate Court, the defendants Aggrieved by the order of the lower appellate Court, the defendants Aggrieved by the order of the lower appellate Court, the defendants filed the present revision petition. filed the present revision petition. Findings of this Court Findings of this 16. From the pleadings of both sides, certain foundational facts emerge as From the pleadings of both sides, certain foundational facts emerge as From the pleadings of both sides, certain foundational facts emerge as From the pleadings of both sides, certain foundational facts emerge as broadly undisputed. It is not in controversy that Mahendra Narendra Charitable broadly undisputed. It is not in controversy that Mahendra Narendra Charitable broadly undisputed. It is not in controversy that Mahendra Narendra Charitable broadly undisputed. It is not in controversy that Mahendra Narendra Charitable Education Trust is a registered trust and that a trust deed was executed at the time Education Trust is a registered trust and that a trust deed was executed at the time Education Trust is a registered trust and that a trust deed was executed at the time Education Trust is a registered trust and that a trust deed was executed at the time eation. Both parties also accept that a school has been running over the suit of its creation. Both parties also accept that a school has been running over the suit eation. Both parties also accept that a school has been running over the suit eation. Both parties also accept that a school has been running over the suit property under the banner of the Trust for many years, though they differ regarding property under the banner of the Trust for many years, though they differ regarding property under the banner of the Trust for many years, though they differ regarding property under the banner of the Trust for many years, though they differ regarding who presently manages it. There is also no dispute that after July 2024, complaints who presently manages it. There is also no dispute that after July 2024, complaints who presently manages it. There is also no dispute that after July 2024, complaints who presently manages it. There is also no dispute that after July 2024, complaints tted to various authorities, including the police, by one side or the were submitted to various authorities, including the police, by one side or the tted to various authorities, including the police, by one side or the tted to various authorities, including the police, by one side or the other, concerning alleged interference at the school premises. Thus, while the other, concerning alleged interference at the school premises. Thus, while the other, concerning alleged interference at the school premises. Thus, while the other, concerning alleged interference at the school premises. Thus, while the authority and control over the Trust is contested, the existence of the Trust, the authority and control over the Trust is contested, the existence of the Trust, the authority and control over the Trust is contested, the existence of the Trust, the authority and control over the Trust is contested, the existence of the Trust, the on the suit land, and the fact that the parties approached existence of the school on the suit land, and the fact that the parties approached on the suit land, and the fact that the parties approached existence of the school administrative authorities in July 2024 stand admitted. administrative authorities in July 2024 stand admitted. administrative authorities in July 2024 stand admitted. 17. he parties are at serious variance on almost every material aspect The parties are at serious variance on almost every material aspect he parties are at serious variance on almost every material aspect he parties are at serious variance on almost every material aspect relating to the functioning, control, and internal administration of the Trust and the relating to the functioning, control, and internal administration of the Trust and the relating to the functioning, control, and internal administration of the Trust and the relating to the functioning, control, and internal administration of the Trust and the possession and management of the school. The plaintiffs assert that plaintiff No.2 possession and management of the school. The plaintiffs assert that plaintiff No.2 possession and management of the school. The plaintiffs assert that plaintiff No.2 possession and management of the school. The plaintiffs assert that plaintiff No.2 bearers of the Trust and rely upon several and plaintiff No.3 are the valid office-bearers of the Trust and rely upon several bearers of the Trust and rely upon several and plaintiff No.3 TRIPTI SAINI 2025.12.08 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-7899-2025 (O&M) -8- - resolutions and entries in the proceedings book to establish their authority. The resolutions and entries in the proceedings book to establish their authority. The resolutions and entries in the proceedings book to establish their authority. The resolutions and entries in the proceedings book to establish their authority. The defendants, however, categorically deny the authenticity and validity of these defendants, however, categorically deny the authenticity and validity of these defendants, however, categorically deny the authenticity and validity of these defendants, however, categorically deny the authenticity and validity of these resolutions and assert that defendant No.10 is the Vice resolutions and assert that def Chairman, and thereafter endant No.10 is the Vice-Chairman, and thereafter Chairman, of the Trust and that the plaintiffs have fabricated and manipulated the Chairman, of the Trust and that the plaintiffs have fabricated and manipulated the Chairman, of the Trust and that the plaintiffs have fabricated and manipulated the Chairman, of the Trust and that the plaintiffs have fabricated and manipulated the alleged resolutions. alleged resolutions. 18. Similarly, the parties are divided regarding possession of the school Similarly, the parties are divided regarding possession of the school Similarly, the parties are divided regarding possession of the school Similarly, the parties are divided regarding possession of the school aim to be in peaceful and lawful possession of the suit premises. The plaintiffs claim to be in peaceful and lawful possession of the suit aim to be in peaceful and lawful possession of the suit premises. The plaintiffs cl property and running the school, whereas the defendants contend that they have property and running the school, whereas the defendants contend that they have property and running the school, whereas the defendants contend that they have property and running the school, whereas the defendants contend that they have been managing and running the school since inception and that the plaintiffs are been managing and running the school since inception and that the plaintiffs are been managing and running the school since inception and that the plaintiffs are been managing and running the school since inception and that the plaintiffs are llege that plaintiff No.2 attempted forcible not in possession. The defendants also allege that plaintiff No.2 attempted forcible llege that plaintiff No.2 attempted forcible not in possession. The defendants also a entry into the school on 22.07.2024 and later removed the proceedings book on entry into the school on 22.07.2024 and later removed the proceedings book on entry into the school on 22.07.2024 and later removed the proceedings book on entry into the school on 22.07.2024 and later removed the proceedings book on 25.07.2024, whereas the plaintiffs allege interference and obstruction by the 25.07.2024, whereas the plaintiffs allege interference and obstruction by the 25.07.2024, whereas the plaintiffs allege interference and obstruction by the 25.07.2024, whereas the plaintiffs allege interference and obstruction by the defendants. 19. ing the nature of rights over the The parties are also in dispute regarding the nature of rights over the The parties are also in dispute regard The parties are also in dispute regard suit land. While the plaintiffs assert possession consistent with the Trust’s suit land. While the plaintiffs assert possession consistent with the Trust’s suit land. While the plaintiffs assert possession consistent with the Trust’s suit land. While the plaintiffs assert possession consistent with the Trust’s functioning, the defendants claim that the land continues to be joint, has not been functioning, the defendants claim that the land continues to be joint, has not been functioning, the defendants claim that the land continues to be joint, has not been functioning, the defendants claim that the land continues to be joint, has not been partitioned, and that each co-sharer has rights in every por partitioned, and that each co tion of it. Further, there sharer has rights in every portion of it. Further, there is controversy regarding who lawfully operates the Trust bank account and pays is controversy regarding who lawfully operates the Trust bank account and pays is controversy regarding who lawfully operates the Trust bank account and pays is controversy regarding who lawfully operates the Trust bank account and pays the salary of staff, with each side alleging misuse or manipulation by the other. the salary of staff, with each side alleging misuse or manipulation by the other. the salary of staff, with each side alleging misuse or manipulation by the other. the salary of staff, with each side alleging misuse or manipulation by the other. 20. Having considered the pleadings of the parties, the admitted and Having considered the pleadings of the parties, the admitted an Having considered the pleadings of the parties, the admitted an Having considered the pleadings of the parties, the admitted an disputed facts, and the findings recorded by both courts below, this Court is of the disputed facts, and the findings recorded by both courts below, this Court is of the disputed facts, and the findings recorded by both courts below, this Court is of the disputed facts, and the findings recorded by both courts below, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Trial Court has adopted the correct legal approach, considered opinion that the Trial Court has adopted the correct legal approach, considered opinion that the Trial Court has adopted the correct legal approach, considered opinion that the Trial Court has adopted the correct legal approach, whereas the Lower Appellate Court has exceeded the permissible limits of whereas the Lower Appellate Court has exceeded the permissible limits of whereas the Lower Appellate Court has exceeded the permissible limits of whereas the Lower Appellate Court has exceeded the permissible limits of the interlocutory stage. adjudication at the interlocutory stage. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.12.08 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-7899-2025 (O&M) -9- - 21. It is an admitted position that the central controversy between the It is an admitted position that the central controversy between the It is an admitted position that the central controversy between the It is an admitted position that the central controversy between the parties hinges upon the validity and authenticity of the resolution dated parties hinges upon the validity and authenticity of the resolution dated parties hinges upon the validity and authenticity of the resolution dated parties hinges upon the validity and authenticity of the resolution dated 20.06.2023, which allegedly resulted in nomination/elevation of plaintiff no.2 as 20.06.2023, which allegedly resulted in nomination/elevation of plaintiff no.2 as 20.06.2023, which allegedly resulted in nomination/elevation of plaintiff no.2 as 20.06.2023, which allegedly resulted in nomination/elevation of plaintiff no.2 as Chairperson/Chairperson of the Trust. From the material placed on record Vice-Chairperson/Chairperson of the Trust. From the material placed on record Chairperson/Chairperson of the Trust. From the material placed on record Chairperson/Chairperson of the Trust. From the material placed on record and from the pleadings already analysed, it is evident that the said resolution is and from the pleadings already analysed, it is evident that the said resolution is and from the pleadings already analysed, it is evident that the said resolution is and from the pleadings already analysed, it is evident that the said resolution is seriously disputed, its genuineness, signatures, manner of preparation, handwriting, seriously disputed, its genuineness, signatures, manner of preparation, handwriting, seriously disputed, its genuineness, signatures, manner of preparation, handwriting, seriously disputed, its genuineness, signatures, manner of preparation, handwriting, e of two inks, all raise debatable and triable issues that can only be and existence of two inks, all raise debatable and triable issues that can only be e of two inks, all raise debatable and triable issues that can only be e of two inks, all raise debatable and triable issues that can only be adjudicated after evidence is led. The Trial Court rightly observed that prima facie adjudicated after evidence is led. The Trial Court rightly observed that prima facie adjudicated after evidence is led. The Trial Court rightly observed that prima facie adjudicated after evidence is led. The Trial Court rightly observed that prima facie suspicion arises regarding the document, whereas the Lower Appellate Court has suspicion arises regarding the document, whereas the Lower Appellate Court has suspicion arises regarding the document, whereas the Lower Appellate Court has suspicion arises regarding the document, whereas the Lower Appellate Court has st as an established fact without subjecting it to trial scrutiny. treated the same almost as an established fact without subjecting it to trial scrutiny. st as an established fact without subjecting it to trial scrutiny. treated the same almo 22. Similarly, the Trial Court also relied upon the circumstance that no Similarly, the Trial Court also relied upon the circumstance that no Similarly, the Trial Court also relied upon the circumstance that no Similarly, the Trial Court also relied upon the circumstance that no recent salary slips have been produced by the plaintiffs to prima facie show their recent salary slips have been produced by the plaintiffs to prima facie show their recent salary slips have been produced by the plaintiffs to prima facie show their recent salary slips have been produced by the plaintiffs to prima facie show their institution, whereas the defendants have filed continued administration of the institution, whereas the defendants have filed institution, whereas the defendants have filed continued administration of the Mar 2025) supporting their version of possession and recent salary slips (Jan–Mar 2025) supporting their version of possession and Mar 2025) supporting their version of possession and recent salary slips (Jan management. Whether those slips are fabricated or not is again a matter of trial. management. Whether those slips are fabricated or not is again a matter of trial. management. Whether those slips are fabricated or not is again a matter of trial. management. Whether those slips are fabricated or not is again a matter of trial. resolutions and older salary The Lower Appellate Court, however, treated older resolutions and older salary The Lower Appellate Court, however, treated older The Lower Appellate Court, however, treated older bills as conclusive proof of current possession, which is inconsistent with the bills as conclusive proof of current possession, which is inconsistent with the bills as conclusive proof of current possession, which is inconsistent with the bills as conclusive proof of current possession, which is inconsistent with the settled principle that possession must be established as on the date of the settled principle that possession must be established as on the date of the settled principle that possession must be established as on the date of the settled principle that possession must be established as on the date of the suit/application, and must be based on current and credible documents. suit/application, and must be based on current and credible documents. suit/application, and must be based on current and credible documents. 23. More importantly, at the stage of deciding an application under Order More importantly, at the stage of deciding an application under Order More importantly, at the stage of deciding an application under Order More importantly, at the stage of deciding an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, the Court is not expected to conclusively determine 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, the Court is not expected to conclusively determine 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, the Court is not expected to conclusively determine 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, the Court is not expected to conclusively determine disputed questions such as who is the lawful Chairperson of the Trust, who is disputed questions such as who is the lawful Chairperson of the Trust, who is disputed questions such as who is the lawful Chairperson of the Trust, who is disputed questions such as who is the lawful Chairperson of the Trust, who is , whether particular resolutions are genuine or authorised to run the school, whether particular resolutions are genuine or , whether particular resolutions are genuine or authorised to run the school fabricated, whether a particular party fabricated, whether a particular party fabricated, whether a particular party fabricated, whether a particular party is duly elected or nominated. is duly elected or nominated. is duly elected or nominated. is duly elected or nominated. These These These These issues require evidence, expert examination (if necessary), cross- issues require evidence, expert examination (if necessary), cross issues require evidence, expert examination (if necessary), cross issues require evidence, expert examination (if necessary), cross TRIPTI SAINI 2025.12.08 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (O&M) CR-7899-2025 (O&M) -10- - f restricting examination, and a full trial. The Lower Appellate Court, instead of restricting examination, and a full trial. The Lower Appellate Court, instead o examination, and a full trial. The Lower Appellate Court, instead o
Decision
Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 2025 December 05, 2025 tripti ( (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking speaking : Speaking Whether speaking/non : Yes/No : Yes/No Whether reportable Whether reportable TRIPTI SAINI 2025.12.08 16:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document