Narayanasami Pillai v. Gopalakrishna Naidu

Plaintiff sued defendant for Rs. 95 for fireworks supplied to defendant as trustee of a temple. The District Munsif found the claim to be true, but nonsuited plaintiff on the ground that the defendant was no longer trustee and the temple was liable. Plaintiff seeks to have the decree reversed. Defendant may have his remedy against the trust but cannot be said that he is absolved from all liability to plaintiff by the mere fact that he has ceased to be trustee.

“Such a trustee has got his personal credit to pledge and the presumption should be that, when he incurred a debt without charging the trust properties, the creditor lent the money on such personal credit.”

The principle would apply to an ordinary trustee who is not a sanyasi. Lakshmindrathirtha Swamiar v. Raghavendra Rao(1). In Sundaresan Chettiar v. Viswanada Pandara Sannadhi(2), it is shown that the proper decree in cases of this sort is a decree for payment by the defendant personally and out of the temple funds.

The defendant does not appear to oppose this petition.

I reverse the decree of the lower Court and order that a decree issue as prayed for against the defendant with costs.

C.KDecree reversed.