LAKSHMI PRAPANNACHARI Vs. SATRUHANA CHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a second appeal by the plaintiffs from a decision of the learned Second Subordinate Judge of Patna, dated 29 April 1944, by which decision the learned Subordinate Judge has substantially reversed the judgment and decree passed by the learned third Munsif of, Patna in Title Suit No. 5 of 1940.

(2.) The suit out of which the appeal has arisen was a suit for a declaration that a sale deed executed by defendant 1, Satruhana Chari (respondent 1 in this appeal) on 30 April 1988, in favour of defendant 2 (respondents here) was invalid, inoperative and illegal, and for setting aside the said sale and recovery of possession of 1.23 acres of raiyati land, conveyed by the said sale deed.

(3.) The suit was originally brought by plaintiffs 1 to 6 as members of a Managing Committee in respect of certain debottar properties (comprising the land in dispute), which I shall presently describe. Plaintiff 7 Mahanth Lakshmi Prapannachari was originally made defendant 3, but was subsequently transposed as plaintiff 7. It was alleged that he was the shebait of the deity to which the properties were dedicated. The case of the plaintiffs-appellants was that one Swami Rajendrachari had founded four thakurbaris, one after the other, at (1) mauza Muhammadpur Uchaili, (2) mauza Abdhara, (3) mauza Badrabad and (4) mauza Ibrahimabad Terait. In the said thakurbaris: Swami Rajendrachari had installed idols off Sri Thakurji Maharaj and had dedicated properties acquired by him to each of the thakurbaris. Swami Rajendrachari is stated to have executed a deed of trust for the purpose on 31 August 1911. By the said trust deed Swami Rajendrachari constituted a Committee of Management for the purpose of managing and supervising the properties of the thakurbaris. Though Swami Rajendrachari himself became the first shebait or gaddinashin of the said thakurbaris, he gave the Committee of Management power to retain him in the said office at their will, and also gave them power to appoint a shebait or gaddinashin from amongst his disciples in the event of death, resignation or moral incapacity of the existing shebait. Swami Rajendrachari died in 1915. After his death, Basudeo. Brahmachari was appointed shebait by the Committee. Basudeo Brahmachari, how ever, mismanaged the properties, and surreptitiously executed a deed of nomination, dated 10 June 1935, in favour of the respondent Satruhana Chari, his nephew, by virtue of which he abdicated in favour of his nephew. The appellants alleged that this deed of nomination was executed fraudulently, surreptitiously and without any authority: therefore, respondent 1 derived no title by it. Then on 30 April 1938, respondent 1 transferred 1.23 acres of land belonging to the deity, and lying in village Dhibra in favour of respondent 2 without any legal necessity. Basudeo Brahmachari died during the pendency of the suit, and Mahanth Lakshmi Prapannachari was appointed shebait by the Committee, on the death of Basudeo Brahmachari. The appellants case is that Lakshmi Prapannachari is the rightfully appointed shebait. So the appellants prayed for a declaratory relief to the effect that no title to the disputed property had passed to respondent 2 by the said sale deed, and that the property in question should be restored to the rightful shebait.