MUNISH KUMAR Vs. BAGHULA MUKHI DEVI BANKHANDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is the defendant who has filed this second appeal. The parties, herein-after in the judgment, shall be referred to as 'plaintiff' and 'defendant'.

(2.) The suit out of which this appeal has arisen, was filed by Baghula Mukhi Devi, Bankhandi through its Mohitmim and Mahant Shanti Gir seeking declaration that the defendant is not entitled to interfere with the management and control of the temple and the properties attached to it as detailed in the plaint. It was also stated that he was not the 'Chela' of Shanti Gir through whom the present suit has been filed and the defendant is wrongly claiming his rights of management in the affairs of temple whereas he has no such right nor he is the 'Chela' of Mahant Shanti Gir as is being claimed by him. The temple has considerable property attached to it. A part of the property is said to be in possession of the defendant and decree for possession has also been claimed in respect of that property. The defendant is sought to be permanently restrained from interfering with the management of the temple, its religious affairs and customary rituals and ceremonies in the conduct of 'POOJA' and looking after the other services required.

(3.) The present suit was filed on Dec. 31, 1980 and incidently, Mahant Shanti Gir, through whom the present suit was filed, died on the very next day, i. e. January 1, 1981 and the suit after the death of the deceased Mahant has been pursued by Devi Gir who claimed himself to have been legally appointed as Mahant and Mohitmim of the temple and was also held to be legal representative of deceased Mahant vide order passed by the learned trial Court dated June 11, 1984.