JAGANNATH GIR Vs. TIRGUNA NAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit in which the plaintiff claimed a declaration that he was entitled to certain math property as the mahant thereof in succession to the last mahant. It appears that the last mahant, one Narain Gir, was a minor and that the property was taken over by the Court of Wards. After his death the plaintiff made claim, as did certain other persons who are the defendants to the present suit. The Court of Wards, which is in possession of the property, declined to hand over possession until some one should establish his title to the mahantship.

(2.) The lower court without going into the merits has dismissed the plaintiffs suit upon two grounds, namely, that the Court of Wards was not made party to the suit, and that the plaintiff did not claim possession.

(3.) It seems to m that the suit ought not to have been dismissed on either of these grounds. The Court of Wards made no claim to the property. If the Court of Wards wished to be made a party to the suit it could apply to the court to be made a party on its peril on the question of costs. If the court below thought that the suit could not be disposed of without the Court of Wards being a party, it could, and in our opinion, ought to have exercised its jurisdiction in making the Court of Wards a party to the suit. We, however, think that it is highly probable in the present case that the Court of Wards will be perfectly satisfied with the decision of the court in the present suit, and that it had no desire of any kind to be made a party to the proceedings.