JAGADGURU SHIVANAND HUMAN WELFARE ASSOCIATION AND ORS Vs. DR SUSHILABAI W/O NAGAPPA HUMBARAWADI AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's second appeal challenging the judgment and decree of the Courts below where the suit of the plaintiff is dismissed. The subject matter of the suit is an open site bearing CTS No.3767/A measuring 3440 sq. yards. Situated in Makangalli which is morefully described in para no.1 of the plaint and which is hereinafter referred to as the "schedule property".

(2.) The plaintiff is Sri Jagadguru Shivanand Human Welfare Association, an Association registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act. Sri Jagadguru Nandishwar Swamy Guru Shivanand Bhat is the President of the said association. He is also the Swamiji or Mahant of Sri Jagadguru Shivanand Mutt of Gadag. The plaintiff is the owner of the suit property. The President of the association who is also the Swamiji of Sri Shivanand Mutt could not manage the property of the plaintiff association. He appointed defendant no.2 as his power of attorney holder only to manage the properties of the plaintiff association. Accordingly, he executed a general power of attorney on 16.10.1982 in favour of defendant no.2 authorizing the defendant no.2 only to manage the properties of the plaintiff association and the mutt. He had not authorized the defendant no.2 to mortgage, sell or lease or alienate in any way, any of the properties belonging to the Mutt. Defendant no.2 without any authority and colluding with defendant no.1 leased the suit properties to defendant no.2 on a yearly rent of Rs.4,500/- per year for a period of 80 years. Accordingly, defendant no.2 executed a registered lease deed on 07.06.1983 in favour of defendant no.1 and has shown that possession has been delivered to defendant no.1. The said lease transaction is illegal and void as the defendant no.2 had no authority to lease the suit property. Defendant no.1 cannot acquire any right, title or interest of any kind over the property under the lease deed.

(3.) After service of summons, the defendant no.1 entered appearance and filed a detailed written statement contesting the claim. The formation of the Society, Swamiji being the President of the association was admitted. It is the specific case of the first defendant that defendant no.2 was fully authorized by the Swamiji with the power of attorney not only to manage but also to lease out the properties for the benefit of the association and the Mutt. Swamiji was aware of the lease transaction relating to the suit property. The said transaction has taken place with the knowledge and consent of Swamiji. There were pressing demands for the recovery of the dues by Khadi and Village Industries Board, Bangalore against the plaintiffs. Recovery proceedings were also started by the said Board through the Revenue Inspector, Gadag for recovery of Rs.19,211/- as arrears of land revenue.