TMI Blog2005 (4) TMI 608X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statutory tribunal which would not derive a jurisdiction unless a reference in terms of the provisions of the Act is made to it, the Civil Court enjoys a plenary jurisdiction. Furthermore, if and when a dispute arises before the competent authority as regard entitlement of an educational agency in relation to educational institutions, the same must also be referred to the Civil Court. Statutory authority in terms of Section 5 of the Act cannot be said to have any jurisdiction to determine such a dispute. A statute, as is well-known, must be read in such a manner so as to give effect to the provisions thereof. It must be read reasonably. A statute must be construed in such a manner so as to make it workable. The wordings referred by the persons interested would, thus, mean a person who has a grievance as regard claim of other side relating to educational agency of the educational institutions. It can be done by filing a suit before the Civil Suit. The term persons which is plural has been used having regard to the fact that educational agency need not be a person alone but would also include a society registered under the Societies Registration Act or a body corporate in terms of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to dedicate their properties to Tapovanam to enable it to establish educational institutions. 4. It is not in dispute that in the year 1987, the First Appellant herein got a Trust registered known as Sri Ramakrishna Ashramam Trust . A claim was set up by him to the effect that all the institutions at Karur had been founded by him from his own money as well as the money collected by him individually. He filed a suit in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Karur, marked as O.S. No.251 of 1991, for a declaration that he along with other members were the owners as well as founders of the educational agencies of the six educational institutions mentioned in the plaint. The said suit was dismissed as withdrawn whereupon he filed another suit, marked as O.S. No.1368 of 1990 in the Court of the District Munsif at Karur, which was subsequently transferred to the Court of Subordinate Judge, Karur and renumbered as O.S. No.459 of 1991, the subject-matter whereof was two educational institutions, namely, Sri Vivekananda Higher Secondary School for Boys and Sri Sarada Girls Higher Secondary School at Pasupathipalayam. In the said suit a question arose as regard the status of the First Appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es more fully and in details described in Schedule-A therein, and furthermore it was the educational agency in respect of the institutions mentioned therein. The Appellants herein in their written statement, inter alia, contended that the Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 were independent trusts and no money in relation thereto was contributed by Tapovanam for establishing the institutions and furthermore the Appellant No.1 herein was not its agent. 11. In said suit filed before the learned Subordinate Judge, Trichirapally, the following issues were framed : (i) Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for declaration and possession as prayed for? (ii) Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for an injunction as against the 1st defendant from projecting himself as the Secretary and Correspondent? (iii) Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for accounting relief? (iv) Whether assignment deeds dated 22.5.1987 and 15.7.1989 are enforceable against the Plaintiff? (v) Whether the Plaintiff is the owner of the B-Schedule properties or any other properties acquired by the 1st defendant? (vi) To what relief? (vii) Whether the suit claim had been valued properly and whether correct Court fee had been paid on the Plain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 53A of the Act being an exception to Section 53 thereof, the Civil Court had the necessary jurisdiction to determine the issue as to whether the plaintiffs or the defendants were the educational agencies in terms of the provisions of the said Act. RES JUDICATA : 17. O.S. No.1368 of 1990 was filed by the Appellant Nos. 1 and 2 against Tapovanam and three others, namely, Swamy Bodhananda Swamy Guhananda and Swamy Amalananda. 18. In the said suit, it was accepted that the First Appellant was a disciple of Swamy Chidbhavananda. It was claimed that the six educational institutions, namely Vivekananda Primary School having standard 1 to 5 in Pasupathipalayam, Karur Taluk; (2) Vivekananda English School having standard 1 to 5 at Pasupathipalayam, Karur Town, Karur Taluk; (3) Vivekananda Higher Secondary School (Boys); (4) Vivekananda Matriculation Higher Secondary School at Pasupathipalayam, Kaur Taluk; (5) Sri Saratha Girls Higher Secondary School at Pasupathipalayam, Karurn Taluk, and (6) Sri Saratha Nikathan College of Science for Women at Sri Sarathapuri, Karur, were founded by the First Appellant herein alleging that the funds for the educational institutions and ashrams were raise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lding : It was also admitted that all the official records stand in the name of the first defendant, and even the correspondence for the same was taken only by the second plaintiff. It is also not disputed that second plaintiff was acting as Correspondent cum Secretary of these educational institutions. The schools have been constructed in a lease hold premises, and the lease deed was also taken in the name of the first defendant. It is in this background, we have to consider how far the plaintiffs case could be sustained in this case. 22. The High Court noticed the provisions of the Act as also those of the Trust Act and in particular Section 88 thereof, and opined : If the person is bound to protect the interest of another and gains any advantage, that advantage also must go to the persons whose interest he is bound to protect. So, even if by chance second plaintiff can contend that he is the owner, since he was acting throughout only as an agent of the first defendant-society, his claim for ownership cannot be put forward. 23. The Court negatived the contention of the Appellants herein as regard title in respect of the schools in question observing : Courts below have rightly co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case and render justice. 25. The fact giving rise to the cause of action for the said suit is stated in paragraph 19 of the plaint and one of the facts constituting cause of action was said to be the dismissal of the earlier suit and on subsequent dates when the First Appellant refused to hand over the collections made illegally in respect of the suit institutions in spite of the judgment of the court. 26. Osborn s Concise Law Dictionary defines cause of action as the fact or combination of facts which give rise to a right or action. 27. In Black s Law Dictionary it has been stated that the expression cause of action is the fact or facts which give a person a right to judicial relief. 28. In Stroud s Judicial Dictionary a cause of action is stated to be the entire set of facts that give rise to an enforceable claim; the phrase comprises every fact which, if traversed, the plaintiff must prove in order to obtain judgment. 29. A cause of action, thus, means every fact, which, if traversed, it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove in order to support his right to a judgment of the Court. In other words, it is a bundle of facts which taken with the law applicable to them give ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d decree in the former suit would operate as res judicata. Section 11 does not create any right or interest in the property, but merely operates as a bar to try the same issue once over. In other words, it aims to prevent multiplicity of the proceedings and accords finality to an issue, which directly and substantially had arisen in the former suit between the same parties or their privies, been decided and became final, so that parties are not vexed twice over; vexatious litigation would be put to an end and the valuable time of the court is saved. It is based on public policy, as well as private justice. They would apply, therefore, to all judicial proceedings whether civil or otherwise. It equally applies to quasi-judicial proceedings of the tribunals other than the civil courts. 35. The Appellants did not object to the raising of the said plea by Tapovanam in the suit. As the said plea had adequately been raised in the plaint, in relation whereto the Appellants herein had adequate opportunity to traverse and furthermore both the parties having brought on records all the relevant documents the Appellants herein cannot be said to have been prejudiced in any manner by reason of no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In V. Rajeshwari (supra), this Court while emphasizing the need of raising the relevant plea as well as framing appropriate issues, observed : 12. The plea of res judicata is founded on proof of certain facts and then by applying the law to the facts so found. It is, therefore, necessary that the foundation for the plea must be laid in the pleadings and then an issue must be framed and tried. A plea not properly raised in the pleadings or in issues at the stage of the trial, would not be permitted to be raised for the first time at the stage of appeal [see (Raja) Jagadish Chandra Deo Dhabal Deb v. Gour Hari Mahato, Medapati Surayya v. Tondapu Bala Gangadhara Ramakrishna Reddi and Katragadda China Anjaneyulu v. Kattaragadda China Ramayya]. The view taken by the Privy Council was cited with approval before this Court in State of Punjab v. Bua Das Kaushal. However, an exception was carved out by this Court and the plea was permitted to be raised, though not taken in the pleadings nor covered by any issue, because the necessary facts were present to the mind of the parties and were gone into by the trial court. The opposite party had ample opportunity of leading the evidence in rebutta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ER 748. A cause of action estoppel arises where in two different proceedings identical issues are raised, in which event, the latter proceedings between the same parties shall be dealt with similarly as was done in the previous proceedings. In such an event the bar is absolute in relation to all points decided save and except allegation of fraud and collusion. [See C. (a minor) Vs. Hackney London Borough Council, (1996) 1 All ER 973]. 45. If the parties went to the trial knowing fully well the real issues involved and adduced evidence in such a case without establishing prejudice, it would not be open to a party to raise the question of nonframing of particular issue. 46. In Nedunuri Kameswaramma vs. Sampati Subba Rao [AIR 1963 SC 884], it was observed : No doubt, no issue was framed, and the one, which was framed, could have been more elaborate; but since the parties went to trial fully knowing the rival case and led all the evidence not only in support of their contentions but in refutation of those of the other side, it cannot be said that the absence of an issue was fatal to the case, or that there was that mistrial which vitiates proceedings. We are, therefore, of opinion tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of persons, is an educational agency, in relation to any private school, or as to the constitution of a school committee, or as to the appointment of secretary of the school committee, arises, such dispute may be referred by the persons interested or by the competent authority to the civil court having jurisdiction, for its decision. (2) Pending the decision of the civil court on a dispute referred to it under sub-section (1), or the making of an interim arrangement by the civil court for the running of the private school, the Government may nominate an officer to discharge the functions of the educational agency, the school committee or the secretary, as the case may be, in relation to the private school concerned. 54. Indisputably a dispute with regard to the title over immovable property will have to be adjudicated in the Civil Court alone. Section 53 merely postulates that the Civil Court will have no jurisdiction to decide or deal with any question which is by or under the said Act required to be decided or dealt with by any authority or officer mentioned in the said Act. Section 5 of the Act whereupon reliance has been placed by Mr. Sukumaran for advancing the contention th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me must also be referred to the Civil Court. Statutory authority in terms of Section 5 of the Act cannot be said to have any jurisdiction to determine such a dispute. A statute, as is well-known, must be read in such a manner so as to give effect to the provisions thereof. It must be read reasonably. A statute must be construed in such a manner so as to make it workable. The wordings referred by the persons interested would, thus, mean a person who has a grievance as regard claim of other side relating to educational agency of the educational institutions. It can be done by filing a suit before the Civil Suit. The term persons which is plural has been used having regard to the fact that educational agency need not be a person alone but would also include a society registered under the Societies Registration Act or a body corporate in terms of the Companies Act. In any event, if such a dispute within the contemplation of Section 53A has to be decided by a civil court, it will not attract the bar under Section 53 which applies only to a question which is required to be dealt with or decided by any authority or officer mentioned in the Act. 56. We may notice that after the Second Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... special right or a liability and provides for the determination of the right or liability and further lays down that all questions about the said right and liability shall be determined by the tribunals so constituted, and whether remedies normally associated with actions in Civil Courts are prescribed by the said statute or not. (c) Challenge to the provisions of the particular Act as ultra vires cannot be brought before tribunals constituted under that Act. Even the High Court cannot go into that question on a revision or reference from the decision of the tribunals. (d) When the provision is already declared unconstitutional or the constitutionality of any provision is to be challenged, a suit is open. A writ of certiorari may include a direction for refund if the claim is clearly within the time prescribed by the Limitation Act but it is not a compulsory remedy to replace a suit. (e) Where the particular Act contains no machinery for refund of tax collected in excess of constitutional limits or illegally collected, a suit lies. (f) Questions of the correctness of the assessment, apart from its constitutionality, are for the decision of the authorities and a civil suit does not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
