SHANKARLAL Vs. DEVMURTI SHRIKRISHNA MANDIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 100 of CPC is at the instance of the plaintiffs in the suit challenging the reversal judgment of the first appellate court dated 28/8/2002 allowing the civil regular appeal No. 2 -A/2002 and dismissing the suit of appellants. The trial court by judgment dated 11th November 1998 had decreed the CS No. 93 -A/96.

(2.) THE appellants had filed the suit for declaration and permanent injunction pleading that the suit land which is the agricultural land, is in possession of appellants and their ancestors for last 100 years, though it is recorded in the name of Shrikrishna Mandir. Since the time of their ancestors, the appellants are cultivating the land peacefully and they have acquired the right of Bhumiswami on the principle of Law of Prescription, as also by way of adverse possession. Name of Shrikrishna Mandir is recorded in the revenue record only for the name sake and that the suit land was given to the ancestors of the appellants with ownership right by the then the Ruler and on that basis the appellants are cultivating the suit land. It was further pleaded that no such temple in the name of Shrikrishna Mandir exists and the respondents had no right to auction the suit land. It was further pleaded that three years back, the Tehsildar by issuing notice had called the appellants and had forced them to take the suit land in auction expressing that if the appellants do not take the suit land, it would be given in auction to third party and the appellants under the threat were forced to take the suit land in auction in Rs. 1620/ - with an impression that they have been given the Bhumiswami right but on 20/6/83 through the Patwari, they had come to know that the suit land was being auctioned again in which the appellants had raised objection and thereafter filed the present suit.

(3.) THE trial court by the judgment dated 11th November 1998 had decreed the suit on reaching to the conclusion that the suit land was given to ancestors of the appellants for cultivation 100 years back by the then Jagirdar Ruler. It was also found that the appellants had continued in possession of the suit land for last 100 years and they had perfected their title by way of adverse possession. It was found that in the revenue record, the possession of the appellant's ancestors Dungaji and Ramaji was recorded and the name of Shrikrishna Mandir in the record in respect of suit land is only for the name sake and the real Bhumiswai are the appellants and that the names of respondents No. 1 & 2 in the revenue record has been illegally recorded. It was further found that respondents had no right to auction the suit land and the auction proceedings were illegal. The respondent's plea that the suit land belong to deity of Shrikrishna Mandir and the Collector was managing it as Court of Wards and from the auction of the suit land, the temple was managed was not found to be proved. On the basis of the aforesaid findings, the trial court by decreeing the suit had declared the appellants to be Bhumiswami of the suit land and restrained the respondents by way of permanent injunction from interfering in the possession of the appellants.