RAMGOPAL Vs. BALAJI MANDIR TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The plaintiffs filed a suit against the defendants for the eviction from the house and shop given to them on rent. The plaintiff No. 1 is a religious institution registered under the Madhya Pradesh Public Trust Act. The defendants resisted the suit on various grounds. The trial Court decreed the suit. The defendants filed an appeal before the High Court challenging the decree passed by the trial Court. The Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal finding no merit in it. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) Before the High Court, findings of fact were not disputed. The only ground urged was that plaintiff No. 1 has failed to plead and prove that it is a religious/charitable trust and it was not entitled to get the benefit of exemption notification issued under Section 3 (2) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (for short the Act); consequently, it was necessary for the plaintiff No. 1 to have made out a ground under Section 12 (1) of the Act for getting a decree in view of the decision in the case of Boolchand vs. Atal Ram Sindhi Dharamshala Trust (1998 (1) MPWN 113). The High Court relying on the decision of this Court in Betibai and others vs. Nathooram and others, (1999) 6 SCC 368 held that the plaintiffs were entitled for a decree as passed by the trial Court.