KISHORI LAL Vs. ROHNI SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Regular First Appeal under Section 96 Code of Civil Procedure filed by the Appellants against the judgment and decree of the Court of Learned Additional District Judge, Solan, dated 24.4.1997, vide which the suit of the Appellants was dismissed.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that the Appellants hereinafter also referred to as the Plaintiffs filed a suit under Section 92 Code of Civil Procedure against the original Respondent Garud Dhawaj Sharma, now represented by his legal heirs, hereinafter also referred to as the Defendant.

(3.) IT was further alleged by the Plaintiffs that the said Durga Mandir is a public religious and charitable endowment, constructed over the land described above. The said temple was alleged to have been constructed more than two centuries back and the management was being looked after by a Committee under the presidentship of late Raja Solan, in which Committee several other members were also included. It was alleged that the said Committee firstly appointed one Sh. Shankar Dutt, who was in the service of the then Raja of Bagat (Solan) as Pujari and after his death, the said Committee appointed the Defendant as Pujari, who was being paid a monthly salary of Rs. 15/ -, which was later on increased to Rs. 75 -/ -besides other rations. The offerings in the terms of cash and kind, were not given to the Pujari and the cash offerings were kept by the Temple Committee for the expenses on the temple and its improvement. Defendant No. 1 was appointed as Pujari of the temple and his main job was to maintain the deities and to perform Puja - path and other religious ceremonies. In addition to the above mentioned salary, the Defendant was also provided with accommodation for his residence in the Dharamshala known as Shiv Dayal Dharamshala Trust on the express condition that he is to perform the religious ceremonies from time to time. It was also alleged that it has become necessary for the Court to frame scheme and hand over possession of the trust property and management thereof and the Trustees to be appointed by the Court. There was no written constitution about the management of the temple. Defendant No. 1 was allegedly not recognizing the said committee and has been indulging in several acts of misconduct and has converted the property to his personal use since he has constructed a double storeyed residential house on the land belonging to the temple by dismantling the Dhuna and has also closed the rooms meant for keeping the mortal remains of human beings before those are taken to Hardwar. Thus, it was alleged that in view of all this misconduct, the Plaintiffs are seeking the relief that Defendant No. 1 be removed and new trustee be appointed and the management be handed over after a scheme is framed by the Court.