Public charities
Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 deals with public charities. 1(1) In the case of any alleged breach of any express or constructive trust created for public purposes of a charitable or religious nature, or where the direction of the Court is deemed necessary for the administration of any such trust, the Advocate-General, or two or more persons having an intere The Act came into force on 01 Jan 1909.
1(1) In the case of any alleged breach of any express or constructive trust created for public purposes of a charitable or religious nature, or where the direction of the Court is deemed necessary for the administration of any such trust, the Advocate-General, or two or more persons having an interest in the trust and having obtained the 2 [leave of the Court], may institute a suit, whether contentious or not, in the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction or in any other Court empowered in that behalf by the State Government within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the whole or any part of the subject-matter of the trust is situate to obtain a decree:
(a) removing any trustee;
(b) appointing a new trustee;
(c) vesting any property in a trustee;
3 [(cc) directing a trustee who has been removed or a person who has ceased to be a trustee, to deliver possession of any trust property in his possession to the person entitled to the possession of such property];
d) directing accounts and inquiries;
(e) declaring what proportion of the trust property or of the interest therein shall be allocated to any particular object of the trust;
(f) authorizing the whole or any part of the trust property to be let, sold, mortgaged or exchanged;
(g) settling a scheme; or
(h) granting such further or other relief as the nature of the case may require.
(2) Save as provided by the Religious Endowments Act, 1863 (XX of 1863), 4 [or by any corresponding law in force in 5 [the territories which, immediately before the 1st November, 1956, were comprised in Part B States]], no suit claiming any of the reliefs specified in sub-section (1) shall be instituted in respect of any such trust as is therein referred to except in conformity with the provisions of that sub-section.
6[(3) The Court may alter the original purposes of an express or constructive trust created for public purposes of a charitable or religious nature and allow the property or income of such trust or any portion thereof to be applied cy pres in one or more of the following circumstances, namely :
(a) where the original purposes of the trust, in whole or in part,
(i) have been, as far as may be, fulfilled; or
(ii) cannot be carried out at all, or cannot be carried out according to the directions given in the instrument creating the trust or, where there is no such instrument, according to the spirit of the trust; or
(b) where the original purposes of the trust provide a use for a part only of the property available by virtue of the trust; or
(c) where the property available by virtue of the trust and other property applicable for similar purposes can be more effectively used in conjunction with, and to that end can suitably be made applicable to any other purpose, regard being had to the spirit of the trust and its applicability to common purposes; or
(d) where the original purposes, in whole or in part, were laid down by reference to an area which then was, but has since ceased to be, a unit for such purposes; or
(e) where the original purposes, in whole or in part, have, since they were laid down,
(i) been adequately provided for by other means, or
(ii) ceased, as being useless or harmful to the community, of
(iii) ceased to be, in law, charitable, or
(iv) ceased in any other way to provide a suitable and effective method of using the property available by virtue of the trust, regard being had to the spirit of the trust.]
Section 92, The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act 5 of 1908).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Vidyodaya Trust v. Mohan Prasad R
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgment of Main Case order-7.pdf 2008-02-27 DATE VERIFIED. CA 1633/2008. Pasayat/Sathasivam. s.92 leave is for representative suits vindicating public rights in a public charitable/religious trust. The Court must look beyond the reliefs to the object and purpose; an inter-trustee personal grievance dressed as a public suit is outside s.92 (Swami Paramatmanand / Sugra Bibi). Notice to defendants before leave is a rule of caution, not a condition of maintainability (R.M. Narayana Chettiar).
On this section: s.92 leave is a condition precedent for a representative public-charity suit. The Court looks to the object and purpose, not merely the reliefs; personal inter-trustee grievances fall outside. Notice before leave is a rule of caution, not a condition of maintainability (Vidyodaya Trust).
-
Sri Bakthositha Perumal Temple& ORS. vs B. D. V. Rangarathinam (d) through Lrs.& ORS.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Hindu religious institutions and endowments are specifically exempted from the application of Section 92 and Section 93 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 under Section 5(e) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. Therefore, a suit filed by a Hindu religious institution for recovery of trust properties is maintainable and not barred by the procedural requirements of Section 92 CPC, provided the institution is genuinely a Hindu religious institution performing religious functions.
On this section: Section 92 deals with suits concerning public trusts and requires notification to the Public Trustee or appropriate authority. The Court held this section does not apply to Hindu religious institutions governed by Tamil Nadu Act 1959, thereby allowing direct suits by such institutions.
-
Krishna Kumar Birla vs Rajendra Singh Lodha
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
To sustain a caveat, a caveatable interest must be shown. The test required to be applied is: does the claim of grant of probate prejudice the caveator's right because it defeats some other line of succession in terms whereof the caveator asserts his right. A fundamental characteristic of probate proceedings is that whatever would be the interest of the testator, the same must be accepted and the rules laid down must be followed. Consequently, any person questioning the existence of title in respect of the estate or the capacity of the testator to dispose of the property by will on grounds outside the law of succession would be a stranger to the probate proceeding, inasmuch as none of such rights can effectively be adjudicated therein. A caveatable interest is an interest in the estate of the deceased to which the caveator would otherwise be entitled, subject to having a special interest therein. After coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the concept of reversioner, agnate, and cognate interest in succession has been fundamentally altered. Only heirs specified in Classes I and II under the Act can claim succession. Distant relatives, family members, and executors of an earlier unprobated will do not have caveatable interest in the estate unless they are named as beneficiaries or have direct stake in the distribution. The existence of mutual wills or filing of suit to enforce mutual wills does not create caveatable interest in the original probate proceedings; such enforcement is remedy in equity through specific performance, not in probate court. A later will, even if in breach of mutual will agreement, is valid and probatable as probate court is concerned only with last will of testator.
On this section: Allows suits to establish or enforce trusts. Different from probate proceedings. In probate, court cannot adjudicate title disputes or question testator's capacity which are germane in Section 92 suits.
-
M. T. Khan vs Govt. A. P.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Only one Advocate General can hold the constitutional office under Article 165 of the Constitution of India. The singular form 'Advocate General' in Article 165 must be interpreted literally as singular and cannot be extended to include plural 'Advocate Generals'. However, a State may appoint additional legal counsel and designate them as Additional Advocate Generals under its executive power under Article 162, provided such persons are not authorized to perform any constitutional or statutory functions reserved for the Advocate General. The constitutional scheme contemplates only one person holding the constitutional office to ensure consistency and prevent chaos in the performance of constitutional and statutory functions.
On this section: Cited as a statutory function performed by the Advocate General that cannot be delegated to Additional Advocate Generals
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… In addition, it was contended that the suit filed by the Respondent-Plaintiff before the learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court did not adhere to the requirements contemplated under Section 92 of Code of Civil Procedure 1908, which specially deals with suits against trusts, hence, bolstering the contention that the suit property was never intended to be conceived by the Respondent-Plaintiff to be a trust property. - 11. Furthermore, drawing reference from the contents of the Compromise Decree dated …
-
… The written statement by defendant No. 1 as adopted by defendant Nos. 2-6 and 8: 4.2. The contesting defendants refuted the plaint averments and contended, inter alia , that the suit was not maintainable under the provisions of Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC'); that the trust in question was not impleaded as party; and that the description of suit properties was not correct. 4.2.1. While stating that both Sri Sangappa and his wife died in the vehicular accident that took place at about 3:15 p.m. on 20.05.1994, these defendants …
-
… The protection against mismanagement squarely falls within the domain of who should be recognised as a shebait, and this is addressed elsewhere in the course of the present judgement. Generally speaking, the court is empowered to address such situations upon an application under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. The question of title can be adjudicated upon using the existing legal regime applicable to immoveable property. There is no reason bearing on necessity or convenience that would compel the court to adopt the novel argument set forth by the plaintiffs in Suit 5 that juristic …
Questions about Section 92
What have the courts held on Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure?
Vidyodaya Trust v. Mohan Prasad R (27 Feb 2008) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: s.92 leave is a condition precedent for a representative public-charity suit. The Court looks to the object and purpose, not merely the reliefs; personal inter-trustee grievances fall outside. Notice before leave is a rule of caution, not a condition of maintainability (Vidyodaya Trust). Another 3 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2004 to 2019.
How do I find court cases under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: CPC 92, section 92 CPC, section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 4 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Vidyodaya Trust v. Mohan Prasad R (27 Feb 2008).
What should I read with Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and has it changed?
3 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it.
When did Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure come into force?
Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, cited as CPC 92, came into force on 01 Jan 1909, having been enacted on 21 Mar 1908. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 115. Revision2475 words
- 60. Property liable to attachment and sale in execution of decree1869 words
- 2. Definitions890 words
- 9. Courts to try all civil suits unless barred714 words
- 42. Powers of Court in executing transferred decree653 words
- 35. Costs577 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.