PANCHANAN BANERJEE Vs. SURENDRA NATH MUKERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the plaintiff Panchanan Banerjee brought his suit making as co-plaintiff the deity or Thakur Sri Sri Issur Sitaram Chandra Jiu. The object of the suit is to have a declaration that the plaintiff Panchanan Banerjee is the sole shebait of the deity in question and the main purpose of the plaintiff in seeking this declaration is explained by the fact that certain property dedicated to this deity has been acquired by the Calcutta Improvement Trust and that an award of Rs. 84,000 has been made as compensation therefor. This money is now lying in a certain Court and the plaintiff has brought this suit to establish that he is the person who is in charge of or managing the properties of the deity and that he is entitled and solely entitled to collect this money. So far as the property is concerned it appears from an affidavit of assets which was filed (in the Goods of Soshi Bhusan) in 1922 that the items 1, 2 and 3 and 3/1, Balaram De Street were assessed to rates by the Corporation of Calcutta upon certain annual values - those annual values total a sum of Rs. 2,294. But beyond this reference in the affidavit of assets I am not aware that there is any real evidence as to the income that has in the past been obtained from these properties, nor is there before the Court any statement of account showing what has been done with that income during the last 20 years or so.

(2.) The endowment with which we are concerned was made by one Ram Chand Mukerjee and if we desire to know the conditions of the endowment and the order of succession to the shebaitship we have to study the will of Ram Chand Mukerjee. It appears that the founder Ram Chand Mukerjee died so far back, as 1862. He left a son Panchanan by his first wife and two sons Ramlal and Sashibhusan by his second wife. Panchanan it appears had no son. His branch is made a party to this suit by his daughter's sons of the name of Ganguli who though impleaded have taken no part in the proceedings. They were impleaded at the instance of the learned Judge and not at the instance of the defendants. Ramlal and Sashibhusan died in 1895 and 1911 respectively, Ramlal's branch is represented by his grandson Surendra and two sons Greedharee and Juggernath who are defendants to the suit and contest the plaintiff's claim to be the sole shebait of the idol. Sashi, as I have stated, died in 1911. He had a son Kherode who predeceased him. Kherode had a son Ramsevak and a daughter Ganesjanani. Ramsevak died in 1923 leaving his widow Mayabati. Ganesjanani had married a man named Earn Kali and the plaintiff is their son.

(3.) It appears that after Ram Chand's death there was a partition suit between his sons and his secular properties were divided not on the basis that by his will absolute interest went to Ram Chand's grandsons but on the basis that his sons took an absolute interest in the property. The properties having been divided it further appears that litigation ensued between the brothers and in the end the interest of Ramlal in the property left by his father was purchased in execution by his brother Panchanan. By the will of Ramchand Mukerjee apart from his gift to his sons to which I shall refer in a moment Ram Chand left a legacy of Rs. 30,000 to be invested in company's paper or landed properties and reserved separately for the maintenance of the deity with which we are concerned. The interest or rent accruing due on the Rs. 30,000 was intended by him as an endowment to the deity. His three sons were all executors to the will and they were all responsible for the fact that this sum of Rs. 30,000 was not at first set aside but after the property had been partitioned between them in the manner to which I have referred and after Ramlal's interest therein had been purchased by Panchanan, Panchanan and Sashibhusan agreed that the properties now in question should be given over to the idol in satisfaction of the legacy of Rs. 30,000 which had been given by their father under his will. I mention this to show that there can be no doubt that the properties with which we are concerned are governed by the terms of Ram Chanel's will and that the rights of the parties as regards the management of this debuttar property are to be found in the first instance by scrutiny of Ram Chand's will. Now the passage in the will is to the effect that there are certain idols of an ancestral character and there is this idol to which I have referred and which has been established by Ram Chand himself. The will goes on to say : "Seba or service I make over to my three sons for interest" and it appears that by this he means that he makes them over to his sons for their lifetime. The will then states: after their death my sons sons will get absolute the said real property and the seba and services of Sree Sree Ishore Jeeoos or Deities.