JUDGMENT

K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY,J:- This appeal by special leave is from the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court dated March 14,1973 in S.B. (Civil) 2nd Appeal No. 201 of 1966 (reported in AIR 1973 Rajasthan 263).

2. The case has a long history. It is concerned with a garden (baghichi) with temples of Sri Satyanarayanji, Sri Mahadeoji and other buildings at Motidungri Road in Jaipur. The local Darjees (Tailors) claim that it is their community property. According to them it is known as Baghichi Darjian since it belongs to Darji community. The property, however, was the subject-matter of several litigations. It was claimed by different persons at different intervals on different grounds. One Narayan was admittedly Pujari of the Temples. There was allegation that Narayan purported to have sold the Baghichi in favour of one Khawas Bala Bux. The Panchas of Darjian community filed a suit for cancellation of the sale-deed and possession of the baghichi. The suit was also for declaration of the right to administer the trust of the temples and the other properties. Narayan was the first defendant in that suit. He did not contest the suit. He was, however, summoned and his statement was recorded on July 8, 1925, wherein he admitted that he was only the Pujari of the temples. The other defendants in the suit set up rival title to the property relying upon the sale deed of Samvat 1932 in the name of Raghunath. The trial court dismissed the suit but on appeal the District Judge decreed it. That decree was affirmed by the former Chief Court, Jaipur by judgment Ex. A8 dated September 15, 1928.

3. Thereafter, for about 23 years there was no problem and. there was no rival claimant to the property. But the dispute, started after the death of Narayan. His eldest son Bhonrilal respondent 3 herein made attempts to get his name mutated in the revenue, records as owner of the baghichi. It appears that Bhonrilal after the death of his father was acting as Pujari of the temples. The Darjian community Kalyan Singh, the appellant herein, as well as one Khawas. Suraj Narayan to bring an action for ejectment of Bhonrilal. In 1951 they instituted a suit for his ejectment. In that suit Bhonrilal admitted the Panchayats right to the baghichi but raised a number of other pleas including his title by adverse possession. In 1956 the Munsif Court (West Jaipur) decreed the suit in favour of the Darji community. In 1958 the appeal against that decree was dismissed by the Senior Civil Judge, Jaipur City. Bhonrilal preferred Second Appeal No. 80 of 1958 in the High Court of Rajasthan and obtained stay of delivery of possession on depositing mesne profits at Rs. 251/- per month. On September 15, 1960, the High Court dismissed the second 399 appeal. Thus the title of the Darjee community in respect of the baghichi was again recognised.

4. Even before disposal of the aforesaid second appeal, Ganga Ram the younger brother of Bhonrilal started another round of litigation. On December 12, 1959 , he brought a declaratory suit claiming that he is owner of the property consisting of baghichi and temples. In this appeal we are concerned with the right claimed by him. The suit was primarily against the present appellants Kalyan Singh and Suraj Narayan, since deceased. Bhonrilal was also impleaded as the third defendant. Ganga Ram based his title to the property under a sale deed dated Baishakh Sudi 12 th Samvat 1932 (about 1875 A. D.) and also on a will dated Asaj Sudi 12th Samvat 1973 (about 1916 A.D.). It was further alleged that the baghichi belonged to Bhagala and Girdhari and they sold the same to Raghunath Brahmin. Raghunath constructed the temple of Sri Satyanarainji and other buildings. Raghunath had only one son called Gaurilal and he was issueless. Gaurilal executed a will giving all his properties to Ganga Ram. It was alleged that the earlier suit against Bhonrilal was collusive between the parties. With these allegations, Ganga Ram prayed for the following reliefs :

"(