In Sunday, 12th March, 2017 issue of Parsi Darshan, it was shown that the Audited Income Tax Returns filed by BPP for Financial Year 2015-16 shows that the BPP earned a net Income of Rs. 5.88 crores as excess of Income over Expenditure whilst Yazdi Desai has brazenly shown a deficit of Rs. 6.64 crores for the same period in his article in Parsi Times (PT) of 4th March, 2017, to falsely show justification for increase in service charges by Rs. 750/- pm. He must be having his own set of manipulated documents of accounts just as he showed Two Separate Minute Books only for certain BPP meetings during Mr. Cama’s resignation melodrama of June, 2015 going on in the office of the Charity Commissioner.

In view of the net excess Income of Rs.5.88 crores of BPP for F. Y. 2015-16, where is the deficit and why then the need to increase Service Charges by Rs. 750/- pm from all and sundry.

To justify the fudged figures cited by him in PT, Yazdi Desai tries to clarify that Income from Fixed Deposits of Wadia Baugs on Rs. 134 crores cannot be utilized for general activities of BPP and cites the opinion of Darius Khambatta and Justice (retd.) Srikrishna that Wadia Baug funds can only be utilised for purposes set out in the Wadia Trust Deed, without specifying their actual objects.

Let us now examine the original objects of both the then R.N. and N.N Wadia Trusts. The common object of both Trusts, before they were conveyed to BPP, is “and having for its objects the provision of clean, comfortable and inexpensive residential quarters for the poor and middle class members of the Parsee community professing the Zoroastrian faith and in connection therewith to afford to such persons facilities and conveniences for the performance of funeral and other ceremonies, medical relief, instruction and recreation and for such other purposes as the Trustees may think directly or indirectly conducive to comfort and well being of the said persons and upon further trust to maintain improve, develop, control and manage the said Institution.”

Thus the object is very wide and crystal clear that its funds can be used even for non-housing activities of BPP contrary to what Yazdi Desai misguides the community. Hence the excuse being given that the Counsels opinion does not permit Wadia Baug funds to be used for BPP activities is obviously fallacious.

When the opinions were handed over to the Trustees, a few years back, the Trustees approached M/s Mulla & Mulla’s advocate regarding the veracity of Senior Counsels opinion and were shocked to be informed by their Advocate that according to him the Opinion was not in consonance with the Trust Deed and must have been given based on the so drafted Case for opinion given to them for their opinion. M/s Mulla and Mulla advocate offered that he would make a proper factual Case for opinion and obtain a fresh opinion from other respected Senior Counsels which he was convinced would be directly contrary to the above opinions given. However as the then Trustees wanted to pander to Mr. Wadia for their own vested Agenda, Mulla & Mulla has till date not been authorized by the BPP to get an independent opinion of use of funds of Wadia Baugs by BPP and also whether Wadia Trust has ceased to exist since 1957 when all the properties, assets and funds were Conveyed by a Deed of Conveyance dated 30-04-1957 to the use of Punchayat Trustees “ as far as possible” upon the same Trusts as contained in the R.N. and N.N.Wadia Trust Deed.

Further Ness Baug was never the property of the Wadia Trusts but purchased by BPP from the Petit Trust in1958, with Mr. Neville Wadia as a Confirming party after the Wadia Baugs had already been conveyed to BPP. Thus Income of Ness Baug cannot be taken as Income of Wadia Baugs, which though is still being done.

Thus from the above objects of Wadia Baugs Trust Deed and the Conveyance to BPP, it is obvious that there is no bar on using the full funds of BPP including that of Wadia Baugs for BPP use for community purpose. If there is a doubt then the Trustees should invoke the jurisdiction of the Charity Commissioner and obtain his approval or better still file an Originating Summons in the Bombay High Court for interpretation and the truth will be exposed.

Yes, these funds cannot be used to fuel litigation costs of the Trustees which they seem to be doing vindictively in the case of Mr. Cama’s resignation litigation and the denial of any information to be given to Mrs. Armaity Tirandaz and Viraf Mehta, both litigations being contested by Yazdi Desai through misuse of community charity funds.

It is reported that a Senior Counsel appearing on their behalf has recently raised a bill for over Rs. 1 Crore on BPP which is yet to be paid and there is another bill for Rs. 50 lakhs for further legal costs. Whose father’s Divali that charity funds are misused for their own vindictive litigation.

Coming back to the Accounts of BPP, it is clear that for F.Y. 2015-16, there was surplus Income of Rs. 5.88 crores and not a deficit as falsely claimed by Yazdi Desai to justify the exorbitant increase in service charges. Further for F.Y. 2014-15 there was a surplus Income of Rs. 7.39 crores and for F.Y. 2013-14 surplus Income was in excess of Rs.11 crores.

Read more on Mumbai Samachar