SHRI RAM KISHAN MISSION Vs. DOGAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is defendants' appeal.

(2.) Facts relevant briefly are that Smt Parmeshwari Devi (since dead) was the exclusive owner of the property specified at the foot of the plaint and situate within the municipal limits of Hardwar. On March 13, 1962 she executed a Tamliknama by registered instrument in respect of this property. The property was dedicated by her for use as Dharmashala to be known as "Dharmashala Purshottam Das Ji". Purshottam Das deceased was the husband of the executant. A Board of Trustees was created also by her in this deed with herself as the managing trustee. Clause 12 of the deed provides that during her life time she will have the right to increase or decrease the trustees and to wind up the Trust. On Sept. 16, 1968 this Tamliknama was revoked by Smt. Parmeshwari Devi by another registered instrument followed by a registered deed of gift in respect of the said property made by her in favour of Ram Krishan Mission on 17th Sept., 1968. The gift was accepted by the donee by a resolution dated 9th Nov., 1968.

(3.) The suit giving rise to this appeal was instituted under Order 1 Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure on Feb. 23, 1970 by the plaintiffs representing the Hindus of the Sanatan faith alleging that Smt. Parmeshwari Devi had no right to revoke the Tamliknama executed by her. The dedication was complete and the property vested in the Dharmashala as an endowment for use of the pilgrims. The pfea taken further was that the gift dated 17th Sept. 1968 was not a conscious act of Smt. Parmeshwari Devi nor was it executed, by way at her free will and, in any case, she was not competent to execute the same. The defendants Nos. 1 and 2 resisted the suit contending that, in view of Clause 12 of the Tamliknama, the settlor was competent to revoke the same which she did on Sept. 16, 1978 (1968?) and thereafter executed the deed of gift of her free will for which she was competent.