MINA SHARMA Vs. SATYANARAYAN MANDIR SAMITEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The substantial question of law formulated and to be answered in defendant's second appeal states as under:--

(2.) Mr. B.P. Gupta, leaned Counsel appearing for the appellant/defendant would submit that the First Appellate Court is absolutely unjustified in reversing the judgment and decree of the Trial Court, dismissing the suit, as the plaintiff/trust has failed to prove its income is being utilised for religious and charitable purpose of the trust. Therefore, the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court be set aside and the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court be restored.

(3.) Combating the submissions made on behalf of the appellant, Mr. H.B. Agrawal, Senior Advocate appearing for the respondent/plaintiff would submit that the First Appellate Court is absolutely justified in reversing the judgment and decree of the Trial Court. He would further submit that the plaintiff is a religious institution, registered as a Public Trust under the provisions of the Act of 1951 and has been exempted by the notification dated 7-9-1989 from the provisions of the Act of 1961 and, therefore, the plaintiff is not required to establish with any of the grounds mentioned in Section 12(1)(a) to (p) of the Act of 1961, and the simple termination of the monthly tenancy by serving 15 days' clear notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act would entitle the plaintiff to get a decree for eviction.