POOMAM CHAND Vs. LAXMI NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FACTS leading to the filing of this Second Appeal are as follows : -

(2.) ON January 23, 1961, Dev Kishan, Mangi Lal and Poonam Chand instituted Civil Original Suit No,. 14/1961 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Nagaur with the averments that there is a "bagichi" just adjacent to Pratap Sagar at Nagaur well-known as "ramcharan Dasji Ki Bagichi" with a temple of the deity of Shri Sita Ramji in it. This temple is visited by the public of Nagaur for "sewa pooja" and "darashan". About hundred or hundred twenty-five years before there had been a learned saint Shri Ram Charan Dasji and in his life time, his followers had got constructed this "bagichi" for him. ON the death of Shri Ram Charan Dasji, his chela remained pujari of the deity of Shri Sita Ramji. The last chela (disciple) was Saint Premdas who expired in miti Mah Budi 8 Samvat 1999. Mahant Premdas had neither appointed any chela as his successor and nor he had left any will in that respect to enable the public to appoint a chela and pujari or mahant of this "bagichi".

(3.) FOLLOWING issues were framed by the trial Court: - 1. Whether the plaintiffs and the defendant No. 6 and Nanu Ram, Mohan Lal, Gopi Kishan and Asha Ram were appointed the trustees of the suit property? 2. Whether the plaintiffs have the right to file this suit? 3. Whether the plaintiffs alongwith other trustees appointed defendant No. 1 as pujari of the temple on Rs. 12/- per month on 8. 3. 1951? 4. Whether the plaintiffs for reasons mentioned in para No. 4 of the plaint are entitled to remove the defendant No. 1 from the post of the Pujari? 5. Whether the articles mentioned in the Schedule attached to the plaint were entrusted by the plaintiff to the defendant No. 1 at the time of his appointment and the plaintiffs are entitled to receive them back? 6. Whether the plaintiffs should have paid the Court fees on the full value of the suit property? 7. Whether the suit property is of the value of Rs. 15000/- and the suit is beyond the jurisdiction of this Court? 8. Whether the defendant No. 1 was in possession of the suit property as the recognised chela of mahant Prem Das since Samvat 2007? 9. Whether on 13, 11. 1960 the defendant No. 1 was appointed the mahant by the important mahants of his sect as per custom? 10. Whether the Executive Hakim, Nagaur had the right to appoint the plaintiffs and other persons as trustees? 12. Relief?