LAWS(KAR)-1982-1-24

ADISHAYYA KADAYYA KADADEVARU Vs. DUNDAYYA GURUSHIDDAYYA HIREMATH

Decided On January 22, 1982
ADISHAYYA KADAYYA KADADEVARU Appellant
V/S
DUNDAYYA GURUSHIDDAYYA HIREMATH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under S. 72(4) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') is by Trustees and is directed against the judgment and order, dated 10-4-1978, passed by the Prl. District Judge, Belgaum, in Misc. Appln. No. 222 [1977, on his file, made before him under S. 72 (2) of the Act.

(2.) The brief and relevant facts necessary for the appreciation of the facts and questions in this appeal are: Adishayya Kadayya Kadadevaru, by an application, dated 27-6-1968, before the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Belgaum, under S. 22 of the Act, prayed for inclusion of 20 items of properties shown in the application as the properties belonging to the Trust, namely, Sri Kadasiddeshwar Temple of Konnur village...The same was resisted by Dundayya, the applicant before the District Judge. The Assistant Charity Coumissioner, Belgaum, held that the properties are trust property. That was confirmed by the Charity Commissioner. Aggrieved by the said order, an application was made by the applicant, under S. 72 of the Act, before the District Judge.

(3.) The learned District Judge raised the following points as arising for his consideration. 1, Whether the opponent No. 1 proves that the properties TPC Nos. 124 and 127)4 of Konnur, are the trust properties of Sri Kadasiddeshwar Dev Muth at Konnur? 2, What order? The learned District Judge, re-assessing the evidence, held that the Assistant Charity Commissioner and Charity Commissioner had no jurisdiction to decide the question of title and in that view, according to him, the application was not maintainable. He has also held further, that in the application under S. 22 of the Act, the question whether they were Trust properties or not could not be gone into by the Assistant Charity Commissioner; and further he held that the applicant failed to establish that they were trust properties. In that view, he allowed the application on setting aside the order passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, confirmed by the Charity Commissioner. Aggrieved by the said Order, the Trustees have come up before this Court, under S. 72(4) of the Act, with the above appeal.