ROSHAN LAL Vs. NAND DEVA TEMPLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above second appeal has been filed by the party Defendants other than the State of Himachal Pradesh and their successor-in-interest against the judgment and decree passed by the learned District Judge, Solan dated 2.4.1990 in Civil Appeal No. 91/S/13 of 1985 whereunder the learned First Appellate Judge while allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge Ist Class, Arki decreed the suit filed by Respondents No. 1 to 4.

(2.) The suit in case No. 23/1 of 1983 came to be filed for declaration for the following reliefs:

(3.) The case of the Plaintiffs is that about 300 years prior to the proceedings, the then Ruler Rana Deva of Kunihar was killed in a battle and in his memory, Rana Nand Deva temple was constructed on the land bearing Khasra No. 230 Saabka and Khasra No. 54 Hal situated in Chak Hat-Kot, Kunihar, that the public of Kunihar since then had been worshipping Rana Nand Deva as a deity uptil now and the area of about 12 Biswas was donated to the deity by the Ex-Ruler. It is claimed that in 1948 during the merger of the States, 2 Biswas of land was entered in the name of the State and 10 Biswas of land was left in the name of deity and there was one Katcha Dhara adjoining to the temple over 2 Biswas of land, which was said to have been constructed to provide free drinking water to the public who used to come to worship in the temple. The further case of the Plaintiffs is that the 2nd Defendant was entrusted with the duties to perform Puja in the temple and lit the lamp daily on the Samadhi and he was wrongly shown as tenant Bila Lagan Bawajah Pooja over 3 Biswas of land in Khasra No. 54 min out of the above 10 Biswas of land said to have been donated to the deity and the remaining 7 Biswas of land was said to have been shown in the name of Dev Sathan. The 2nd Defendant was said to have been performing Pooja till 1954 and thereafter started treating the property to be his own and it was alleged that the 2nd Defendant sold the material of Katcha Dhara after demolishing the same and the State of Himachal Pradesh illegally granted proprietory rights to Defendant No. 2 in the Abadi Deh land vide mutation No. 1095 dated 5.6.1976. While asserting that the said grant is illegal, inoperative and ineffective and that no person can be recorded as tenant in the Abadi Deh nor can be allowed to acquire proprietory rights in respect of the same, it is stated that the 3rd Defendant, in execution of the decree obtained by him against Paras Ram, the 2nd Defendant has got the property of 2 Biswas of land illegally auctioned leaving only one Biswa of land adjacent to the temple, and the same was opposed to law. On the above claims, the reliefs as noticed supra were prayed for by the Plaintiffs.