BACHAN DASS Vs. SHIROMANI GURDWARA PARBANDHAK COMMITTEE AMRITSAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of F. A. O. No. 224 of 1966 and F. A. O. No. 14 of 1967, as th are directed against one and the same judgment dated August 1, 1966, of the Sikh Gurdwaras Tribunal (Punjab) Chandigarh. (hereinafter called the Tribunal).

(2.) Briefly stated the facts giving rise to these appeals are that 58 Sikh worshippers filed a petition under sub-section (1) of S. 7 of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the said petition was published under sub-section (3) of S. 7 of the Act, regarding the claim in respect of Gurdwara Siri Guru Granth Sahib situate in the revenue estate of village Lapran, Tehsil Sirhind, District Patiala. Thereupon, Bachan Dass son of Daulat Ram and Bishan Dass son of Khushi Ram filed an objection petition before the State Government under S. 8 of the Act, alleging therein that the land and the house in question had been donated by Bijay Singh of Bhadaur to their forefathers in the year 1860 BK and the same descended to them (petitioners) from them; that they acquired perpetual rights in the properties in question being in possession for the last 161 years and that there never came in existence Gurdwara Sri Guru Granth Sahib in village Lapran nor had it anything to do with the property in question. The, Government treated the objection petition to be one under Ss. 8 and 10 of the Act and forwarded it to the Tribunal for disposal under sub-section (1) of S. 14 of the Act. The Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee (hereinafter called as the Committee) contested the petition and filed written statement. It was averred that the properties in question belonged to a Sikh Gurdwara and that the case fell under the purview of S. 16(2)(iv) or S. 16 (2)(iii) of the Act. During the proceedings before the Tribunal, it was found that no notification under S. 9 of the Act had been issued by the Government and that the objection petition had been wrongly forwarded to the Tribunal as composite petition under Ss. 8 and 10 of the Act. Shri Tehal Singh Mangat, counsel for the petitioners admitted that the petition was under S. 10 of the Act. The petition under S. 8 was dismissed by the Tribunal and the petition under S. 10 was allowed to proceed. The counsel for the Committee filed fresh written statement and it was averred that the land in dispute belonged to the Gurdwara and was granted to the petitioners by the Sardar of Bhadaur for the maintenance of the Gurdwara and it had descended from office. holder to office-holder on more than two occasions. Regarding the house in dispute, it was alleged that it was of the notified Sikh Gurdwara. The pleadings of the parties gave rise to the following issues:-

(3.) Both these issues were decided by the majority judgment of the Tribunal and it was held that the petitioners were entitled to declaration that the land in dispute belonged to them and the house belonged to the notified Sikh Gurdwara. However, Shri Sarup Singh, one of the members of the Tribunal recorded a dissenting judgment and he was of the view that the land in dispute was proved to be belonging to the Gurdwara Siri Guru Granth Sahib and that the petitioners had no right, title or interest in the land in dispute. The Committee has come up in appeal (F. A. O. No. 14 of 1967) claiming that the land in dispute is the property of the scheduled Gurdwara and that the majority view is not correct whereas the petitioners have also challenged the finding of the Tribunal on issue No. 2 through F. A. O. No. 224 of 1966.