STATE OF M.P. Vs. RANCHOR TEEKAM MANDIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal has been filed at the instance of defendants against the judgment and decree of reversal passed by learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Ujjain in Civil Appeal No. 24-A/2003 whereby the judgment and decree dated 20-11-2003 passed by learned Civil Judge, Class I, Mahidpur in Civil Suit No. 162-A/1995 decreeing the suit of plaintiff partly, has been dismissed. Today is the auspicious day because long drawn litigation which was filed near about 33 years ago on 9-7-1980 is being decided today.

(2.) No exhaustive statements of fact are required to be narrated for the purpose of disposal of this second appeal looking to the limited substantial question of law which has been framed and further the facts in detail are already mentioned in paras 2 to 6 of the impugned judgment. For ready reference, it would be condign to state that the disputed property is a temple as well as the agricultural land of temple. According to the plaintiff, the temple is a private temple and was established by the plaintiffs ancestors. Further it has been pleaded that the deity is the Bhumiswami and it is also so recorded in the revenue record. The State of M.P. issued notice to the plaintiff on 7-7-1980 to auction the land and hence the present suit has been filed by the plaintiff on 9-7-1980 for declaration and injunction praying the relief that the suit property be declared as a private temple and the deity is the Bhumiswami of the agricultural land, the description whereof is given in the plaint. A decree of injunction is also prayed that defendants may not interfere in the disputed property and they be not dispossessed.

(3.) The defendants filed written-statement and denied the plaint averments. The defendant No. 5 Manohar is the real brother of Surendra through whom the suit has been filed. The stand of the State Government in its written-statement is that the suit temple is not a private temple and is a public temple. According to the order and directions of the State Government the name of Collector as Vyavasthapak (Manager) of the suit property has been endorsed in the revenue record. According to the defendants, the plaintiff has no case and the suit be dismissed.