New Delhi, the Supreme Court on Tuesday said that a former node from the court was required to file a lawsuit under the provision of the Civil Procedure Code to deal with the public priority as action was initiated by public beneficiaries and that too in public interest.
The apex court issued instructions on legal issues and dismissed an appeal filed by a society registered under the Society Registration Act, 1860, which challenged the maintenance of a suit against it under Section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code.
Section 92 of the CPC relates to cases related to public charitable or religious trusts and allow legal action in cases of alleged violations of the trust, or when the administration of the trust requires a court directive.
“सीपीसी की धारा 92 के तहत एक सूट एक विशेष प्रकृति का एक प्रतिनिधि सूट है क्योंकि कार्रवाई को सार्वजनिक लाभार्थियों की ओर से और सार्वजनिक हित में स्थापित किया जाता है। अदालत से ‘अवकाश का अनुदान’ प्राप्त करने से पहले सूट के साथ आगे बढ़ने के लिए एक प्रक्रियात्मक और विधायी सुरक्षा के रूप में काम करता है, जो कि एक बुद्धि के रूप में है, जो कि एक बुद्धि के रूप में है, जो कि एक बुद्धि के रूप में है, जो कि एक बुद्धि के रूप में है, जो कि एक बुद्धि के रूप में The form of an intellect, which is in the form of an intellect, is in the form of an intellect, which is in the form of an intellect, which does not withdraw resources without any disappointment with any union, which can be placed on public charitable or religious objectives.
168-Writing, Justice Pardwala, however, stated in the grant of the holiday, the court neither depends on the merits of the dispute nor gives any concrete rights over the parties.
“A trust can be made for a ‘public objective’ when beneficiaries are the general public who are unable to find accurately. Even if the beneficiaries are not necessarily the masses, they should have at least one classified section and should not have a pre-group group of specific individuals.”
The special nature of the suit under Section 92 requires the public rights to be filed fundamentally on behalf of the public for vengeance of public rights.
“Therefore, the courts should go beyond relief and also be appropriate about the object and purpose for which the suit is brought. The true nature of the suit should be determined at a wide understanding of the facts of the case and cannot be done for the same,” it is said.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without amending the text.
