Short Note : 1. The applicant is plaintiff in the suit out of which this revision arises. The suit is one for permanent injunction. The applicant had obtained a temporary injunction in the suit. The temporary injunction is in force. On an objection being made by the non-applicants to the effect that the suit could not be heard and decided because the applicant is a public trust not registered in accordance with the provisions of section 32 of the M.P. Public Trusts Act, the trial Court had stayed the hearing of the suit. The applicant was directed to apply and get itself registered as a public trust under the provisions of the M.P. Public Trusts Act. It is stated at the bar that such an application has been moved to the Registrar of Public Trusts and that it is pending. It appears that the non-applicants moved the trial Court stating that the applicant had been given sufficient time to get itself registered, but had failed to do so and, therefore, the proceedings could be terminated. What was actually prayed for was the dismissal of the suit. On being so moved, the trial Court has passed the impugned order permitting the applicant two months time to get itself registered. The Order further says that on failure of the applicant to get itself so registered within the time specified, the suit shall automatically stand dismissed. It is this order which has been challenged in this revision. Held : Having heard the counsel for the parties, I am of opinion that this revision must be allowed. The bar created by section 32 of the Act is only to hearing and deciding a suit and not to its institution or pendency. A suit validly instituted and otherwise competent cannot be dismissed for want of registration of plaintiff which may be a public trust. The only direction which the Court is entitled to make is to stay the hearing of the suit till such time as the plaintiff files a certified copy of the order of registration. In Jawarlal Chunnilal v. Ramkrishna Malik (1962 JLJ 969), under similar circumstances, the following order was passed by the Court. The only direction which the Court is entitled to make is to stay the hearing of the suit till such time as the plaintiff files a certified copy of the order of registration. In Jawarlal Chunnilal v. Ramkrishna Malik (1962 JLJ 969), under similar circumstances, the following order was passed by the Court. “To conclude, I am of the opinion that the present appeal is to be adjourned in order to enable the appellant to get the Trust registered as a Public Trust under the Madhya Pradesh Trusts Act, 1951 till such time as the appellant files a certified copy of the order of registration”. I see no reason to take a different view. 2. Counsel for the non-applicants makes a grievance that having obtained a temporary injunction in its favour, the applicant is delaying its registration as a public trust and is thus reaping the benefit of the temporary injunction so obtained. In fact, the non-applicants want to attribute mala fides on the part of the applicants in delaying registration. If that be so, the non-applicants shall be at liberty to move the trial Court for vacating the temporary injunction. Revision allowed.