A shebaitship is a hereditary office descending in the direct line from father to son and enuring only for the lifetime of each holder of the office. None has any absolute right to it so as to be able to transfer it by relinquishment or otherwise to the exclusion of his heir in the direct line.

Anant Singh, J.

1. This is an appeal by defendants 1 and 2, being defendants first party, against the judgment and decree, dated the 12th December, 1953, of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Darbhanga, decreeing the plaintiffs suit for recovery of possession of his right to manage periodically the affairs of the deity and its properties.

2. The plaintiffs grandfather was Sarjug Pd. Misser. He had two other brothers, Rajendra Pd. Misser and Tribeni Pd. Misser. The two appellants-defendants, Janki Raman Pd. Misser and Ramnan-dan Pd. Misser, are the sons of Rajendra Pd. Misser. The other defendants of the first party are the sons and grandsons of the two appellants-defendants. Defendants 16 and 17 who are the second party are the two widows, and defendant No. 18, the third party is the daughter of Tribeni Pd. Misser.

3. The plaintiffs case is that Sarjug Pd., Rajendra Pd. and Tribeni Pd, constructed a temple from the joint family funds in mauza Jagdishpur, also called Raghunathpur, in the district of Darbhanga. and installed therein the idols of Shri Sitaramji Mithila Behari. For the expenses in pujapath and Rajbhog etc. of the deity, they dedicated the properties shown in schedule I of the plaint conferring therein an absolute right on the deity. The properties were estimated to yield an income of Rs. 900.00 per year.

4. It was agreed among the three brothers that each of them, and on the death of any one of them, his heir or representative, would carry on the management of the affairs of the deity and its properties by turn for a term of three years, commencing from the 1st of Chait 1332 Fs., equivalent to March 1925. Tribeni Pd. was to be the first manager, Rajendra Pd. to be the second and Sarjug Pd. to be the third. The management of the affairs of the deity and its properties was thus first taken up by Tribeni Pd., whose term expired by the end of 1335 Fs. equivalent to 1928, when the turn of management of the appellants father commenced.

Tribeni Pd. executed a will dated the 11th October, 1931, under which he appointed Jankiraman Pd. (defendant No. 1), one of the sons of Rajendra Pd. as the executor to manage the affairs of the deity also on his behalf after his death. Tribeni Pd. died on the 30th August, 1936. Defendant No. 1 was the karta of his own branch, and after the death of his father and uncle Tribeni Pd., he became entitled to manage the affairs of the deity for a term of six years, three years as an heir of his father and for the next three years as the executor of the will of Tribeni Pd.

5. The turn of management of the affairs of the deity by the plaintiffs grandfather, Sarjug Pd. was due for three years from the 1st March 1931, but he died before it in 1929, when the plaintiff was still a minor, his father Raghunandan Pd, having predeceased his father Sarjug Pd. One plaintiff attained the age of majority on the 19th November, 1946, when defendant No. 1 was in charge of the management of the affairs of the deity. The plaintiff asked defendant No. 1 to hand over the management of the temple to him, but he was informed that his turn would coma after the 30th Phagun 1357 Fs. But even after the expiry of that period, he was not given charge of the management in spite of repeated demands. The plaintiff thereafter filed the present suit asking for a relief that the defendants be directed to make over charge of the temple, its properties and the papers to the plaintiff within a reasonable period to be fixed by the court, and in the event of the failure, the plaintiff should be delivered possession of the same. There was also a prayer for accounts from the defendants.

6. The suit was contested by defendant No. 1 alone. There were several pleas taken, such as limitation, estoppel, acquiescence and waiver. The main plea, apart from limitation, was one of re-linquishment in 1927 by the plaintiffs grandfather Sarjug Pd. himself of his periodical right of shebaitship to manage the affairs of the deity. It was said