Judgment

ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

( 1 ) LEAVE granted in s. L. P. (C) No. 14360 of 1998. Both the appeals being interlinked are disposed of together.

( 2 ) KASHI Nath, the original appellants claim of being the adopted son of Bala Bux and Smt. Nangi having been rejected by the trial Court (Court of sub-Judge, Jaipur City), first Appellate Court (Additional District Judge, jaipur City) and the Rajasthan High Court by the impugned judgment in second appeal, the appeal (CA No. 6974 of 1996) has been filed. The other appeal is an offshoot of the other. The claim is intricately linked with functioning as a Pujari in the temple of Thakurji Shri Gopalji in the Jaipur City. The litigation started several decades back relating to the present controversy as to adoption. There have been series of other litigations which are intimately linked with that basic issue also. During the pendency of the appeals the appellant Kashi nath had died and his legal heirs were impleaded.

( 3 ) COMING to the genesis of the dispute regarding adoption the same started when the kashi Nath the original appellant filed a suit for declaration that the temple called Thakurji sri Gopalji belongs to the entire class of vaishnava Worshippers and the defendants- respondents herein who belonged to Khati community have no exclusive right over it and further plaintiff is exclusively entitled to manage the temple, to do sevapuja and to get offerings made to idols. The claim was resisted by the defendants on a number of grounds, one of which was that the plaintiff was not the adopted son of Bala Bux. The Trial Court framed issues and after recording evidence decreed the plaintiffs suit by judgment dated 30. 5. 1964. Defendants preferred appeal and the learned district Judge, Jaipur City, set aside the judgment of the Trial Court by judgment dated 3. 6. 1969 dismissing the plaintiffs suit.

( 4 ) PLAINTIFF filed an appeal before the High court which was registered as SB Civil Second appeal No. 149/69. The learned Single Judge who heard the appeal set aside the First appellant Courts judgment dated 6. 3. 1969 and remitted the matter back to the said Court with direction that an amended issue No. 4 was to be framed and the parties were to be granted opportunity to lead evidence on the amended issue. The amended issue reads as follows: "whether there was ceremony of giving and taking at the time of alleged adoption of the plaintiff to Bala Bux and whether the plaintiff is a legally and validly adopted son of the Bala Bux?"

( 5 ) THE First Appellate Court sent the matter to the Trial Court for recording evidence on the additional issue and also to remit its findings. The Trial Court recording the evidence led by the parties and returned the findings on 25. 4. 75 deciding amended issue No. 4 against the plaintiff, and holding that he was not the adopted son of Bala Bux. The Additional district Judge after hearing the parties confirmed the said findings of the Trial Court and ultimately accepted the appeal and dismissed the suit of the plaintiff by judgment dated 9. 12. 75. Thereafter a second appeal was filed before the High Court. During pendency of the appeal in the High Court, defendant-respondent no. 4 Narain died and as his legal representatives were already on record his name was deleted. Another defendant-respondent named Smt. Dekha wife of Kalyan Sahai also died during the pendency of the appeal and her legal representatives were also on record, therefore, her name was also deleted from array of respondents.

( 6 ) STAND of the appellant before the High court was that the approach of the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court was erroneous in view of several judgments/orders passed in different proceedings. It was clearly established that the appellant was the adopted son of Bala bux. The minor variations highlighted by the trial Court and the First Appellate Court were but natural, when one considers the position that the adoption was claimed to have been taken place in 194