LOKENATH BADU Vs. BATAKRISHNA PRAHARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal from the appellate judgment of the Subordinate Judge of Puri modifying the judgment and decree passed in favour of the appellants by the munsif of Khurda.

(2.) THE dispute is between some of the Badu sebaks (appellant) of the well known temple of Sri Lingaraj of Bhubaneswar on the one hand and the Board of Trustees of the Temple (respondents) appointed by the Commissioner of Hindu Religious endowments, on the other, as regards their respective rights to appropriate the offerings made at the Temple by pilgrims. There was a previous dispute (O. S. No. 84 of 1949) which was compromised on 23-1-1951 and the terms of the compromise were incorporated in the decree (Ex. 1 ). In that litigation the trustees of the temple were (1) Shri Pareswar Mohanty, a senior Advocate of Cuttack Bar (since dead) (2) Shri Bichitrananda Das, and (3) Shri Satya Priya Mohanty. They and the Badus (appellants) joined in the compromise petition, but subsequently difference arose regarding the interpretation of some of its terms and this resulted in the present litigation. I specially refer to the fact that two Senior Advocates of cuttack joined in the compromise petition, mainly in order to emphasise that when they did so, they may be presumed to have been aware of the leading decisions regarding the respective rights of the Deities and Sebaks in public temples to appropriate the offerings made by the pilgrims.

(3.) A Nepali gentleman visited the Shrine on the 14th March 1954 and offered a silver Trishul (weighing about 50 Tolas) and a pair of silk cloths for Lord Lingaraj and the Shakti attached to the Lingam and four sarees for the Goddess Parvati located in another shrine within the temple. The plaintiffs being the present trustees claimed that by virtue of the previous compromise the silver Trishul and the silk Sarees all belonged to the Temple and that the Badu Sebaks had no right to the same. The defendants however contended that in accordance with the terms of the compromise they were entitled to appropriate all these articles and that they did not belong to the temple. The trial Court held that the pair of cloths and the silver Trishul offered at the shrine of Lord Lingaraj should be equally appropriated between the plaintiffs and defendants. As regards the silk sarees presented to Goddess Parvati whose idol is located in a separate subsidiary shrine inside the main temple, the trial Court held that the plaintiffs had no claim to them whatsoever as the compromise decree dealt only with the offerings made at the main temple of Lord Lingaraj and not with the offerings made at the subsidiary shrine inside the main Temple. The lower appellate Court however held that the plaintiffs alone were entitled to the silver Trishul; but in other respects, he confirmed the judgment and decree of the trial Court.