MOHINDER SINGH Vs. SHIROMANI GURDWARA PARBANDHAK COMMITTEE, AMRITSAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs are petitioners before this Court. The plaintiffs filed a suit for possession of agricultural land measuring 1502 kanals and also for recovery of Rs. 1,50,000/- for the paddy and other crops.

(2.) The plaintiffs claimed that Dera Baba Gandha Singh belonged to Nirmla Bhaikh. At one point of time, it was headed by Mahant Bhan Singh who died in 1974 and was succeeded by Mahant Gurbachan Singh. On July 11, 1975, Mahant Gurbachan Singh in collusion with Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee got the Dera declared as Sikh Gurdwara Sikh Gurdwara Tribunal. One Sajjan Singh, Advocate at the instance of Mahant Gurbachan Singh made a statement before the Tribunal on behalf of the worshipers to the effect that the institution in question was a Sikh Gurdwara. When the worshippers including Mahant Ram Singh came to know the aforesaid fact, they filed an appeal before this Court. An application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code was also filed. An order for maintenance of status quo was passed on August 20, 1975. The plaintiffs claimed that no notification under Section 17 of the Sikh Gurdwara Act had been issued. On that basis, it was claimed that management of the institution could not vest in the SGPC in June, 1976. It was claimed that the defendant had filed a suit for possession under Section 25A of the Act. An ex parte decree was passed in favour of the aforesaid SGPC on August 2, 1976. Execution of the decree is still stated to be pending. The plaintiffs further claimed that the defendants had cut the crop after taking possession forcibly on October 15, 1977. It was claimed that the crop was worth Rs. 1,50,000/-. On that basis, it was claimed that the plaintiffs were entitled to restoration of the possession as well as the amount of Rs. 1,50,000/-.

(3.) The suit was contested by the defendant SGPC. It was maintained by the defendants that the suit was not view of Section 77 of the Punjab Tenancy Act. It was claimed that the institution in question was not a Nirmla Institution and was a Sikh Gurdwara, Mahant Gurbachan Singh and Sajjan Singh, Advocate on behalf of the worshippers had admitted the claim of SGPC before the Sikh Gurdwara Tribunal voluntarily. Before passing of the order of status quo by this Court, the management of the aforesaid institution had been handed over to SGPC by Mahant Gurbachan Singh. The factum of any forcible dispossession of the institution property was specifically denied by the defendant.