JAGDISH RAM Vs. BAGHULA MUKHI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A suit had been brought by the respondent against one Jagdish Ram for declaration and injunction that he is not entitled to interfere with the management and control of the temple and the property attached to it as set out in the plaint. The trial Court decreed the suit and the first appeal was dismissed. The second appeal was preferred. During the pendency of the second appeal said Jagdish ram is stated to have died and when the suit was for injunction that he was not entitled to interfere with the affairs of the temple, the cause must have died alongwith him. However certain persons impleaded themselves as legal representatives of the Jagdish Ram and pursued with the appeal. The High Court noticed that the questions raised in the appeal had become academic and the matter no longer survived for consideration. But even so the High court noticed that the Mahant could be removed only in a proceeding arising out of a suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure. If that is so we do not see any merit in the grounds now sought to be raised. It is certainly open to the parties concerned to agitate as ordered by the High Court in an appropriate case. In that view of the matter we do not think that any fruitful purpose would be served by interfering with the order under appeal.

(2.) The appeal is therefore dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.