Trusts Act, 1882


Trusts Act,



Mr. Hamidul
Huq Chowdhuiy created a Trust by a regd, deed. He had one son & 6
daughters. His son applied for appointment of Trustee of the Trust. His
daughters mainly of whom opposed it and filed a suit challenging the Trust, and
for partition.

The scope of
section 74 of the Trust Act is limited only to cases and executable one.
Creation, validity, existence and executality of the Trust being disputed, the
trial court correctly held that if the miscellaneous case u/s 74 of this Trust
Act be proceeded with, conflicting decisions might be given which might have
led serious complication. Stay of misc. case stayed till disposal of title suit
granted. [Para-9]

Hamidul Huq
Vs Nafisa Chowdhury & Ors. 3 BLT (AD)-123.



An alien
friend—Section 83 of C.P.C. citizen of India being alien friends can sue in the
court of Bangladesh and there will be no bar under Section 83 of the Code of
Civil Procedure for filing the miscellaneous case for appointment of New
Trustees. [Para-2]

Chandra Saha Vs. Golok Chandra Roy & Ors. 6 BLT (AD)-156.




(II OF 1882)


Sections — 4 to 6

Trust — A trust may
be created by a will if other requirements are satisfied — A person Competent
to contract may create a trust by a will — The grantor need not use the word ‘trust’
to create a valid trust — The absence of the word ‘trust’ in the will does not
vitiate the trust if the intention can be gathered and the requirements of a
trust are established.

Narendra hit Chowdhury
and others Vs. Bimal Kanti Chowdhuiy and others, 3BLD (HCD)40

Ref: A.1.R. 1942(Patna)435; A.I.R.1926 Madras 284;
A.1.R1944(PC)78: A.I.R.l922 (Madras)83— Cited.


Section — 82

Benamder — His
locus standi to maintain a suit for possession — A benamder is a trustee for
the beneficial owner and he represents the real and beneficial owner and as the
legal title is in him he can maintain in his own name a suit for possession — A
proceeding by or against the benamder is fully binding on the beneficial owner.

Kutabuddin Ahmed Vs. Hasna Banu and another. 7BLD (AD) 18

Ref:, 70 C.L.J. 218; 23 C.W.N. 521 (PC): 46 l.A. 1— Cited.


Section — 88

Possession by agent
— Title in the suit land passed to the plaintiff-respondent by absolute sale
whereupon the vendor appellant No. 2 possessed it as an agent of the
respondent. Respondent, therefore, is in possession of the land leaving no
scope for the agent to possess the land adversely against the principal. It is
true that the agency terminated in 1972 but the agent continued in possession.
His possession is in fact possession as a trustee of the owner, principal, in
respect of property against whom he did not put up any claim of title until a
few months before the filing of the suit. As an agent and trustee of the
principal he was under an obligation to vacate the possession.

Mrs Feroza Majid and another Vs. jiban Bima Corporation represented by
its Managing, Director, 7 BLD (AD) 124

Ref: AIR. l944(Mad) 221; A.1.R. 1941 (Mad) 822; A.l.R. 1958
(Cal) 179; A.I.R. 1962 (Pun)379; — Cited.


Section —90

property—One cosharer purchasing the property in an auction sale in benami —
The purchase enures to the benefit of other co-sharers if he is guilty of
corrupt pratice in the transaction in question.

Shealik Debi Vs.
Pearani Debi and others, 1BLD (HCD) 256

Ref: A.I.R.1954 Orissa23; A.I.R.l943 Nag302; A.I.R. I
939(PC)86; A.I.R. 191 6(PC) 227; 16 Cal 194; A.I.R. l919(Cal)43l; A.1.R. 1932
(Cal) 434; A.I.R. 1923(Cal)236; 46 l.A. 1; PLD 1959 (Kar)362 — Cited.