MUNGESHWAR SAHOO, J.:–This first appeal has been filed by the plaintiff appellant against the judgment and decree dated 19.12.1973 passed by Sri Shreedeo Mishra the learned 1st Additional Subordinate Judge, Darbhanga in Title Suit No. 34 of 1965/ 16 of 1968 dismissing the plaintiff appellant?s suit.

2. The plaintiff appellant filed the aforesaid suit for declaration that the Galma Asthal and the properties appertaining to the said Asthal are public trust properties and further for declaration that the order passed by the authority under Section 43 of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Act as wrong, erroneous and the same be set aside.

3. The appellant claimed the aforesaid relief on the facts inter alia that Galma Asthal is coming from time immemorial in village Galma and the defendant is the present Mahanth of the said Asthal. It is public institution belonging to Raman and Vaisnab Sampradaya and succession of the Mahanthship of the Asthal has been from Guru to Chela. Pagri and Chaddar are also invariably given by Guru Mahanth, and also the local resident to the succeeding Mahanth. The Mahanths have always been celibate vairagis and have no attachment for worldly affairs. The old temple of Ram Janki, Laxmanji and Saligramji was built long long ago. The people of the locality and public in general have been worshiping the said deities without any hindrance and they used to make offerings to the deities. The grant of the properties was made to the founder as also to the subsequent Mahanth for religious for charitable purpose of public nature. Subsequently, some properties were also acquired out of the savings and income of the trust properties. The founder of the Asthal and the subsequent Mahant have always been holding the properties as trust properties for religious and charitable purpose. They have not used the properties as owner. The deities are the presiding deities of the Asthal. When the defendant refused to submit to the jurisdiction of the plaintiff, the plaintiff filed a petition under Section 43 of Act before the authorities for declaration that the Asthal and the temple with properties were public trust properties. The defendant contested the said proceeding and the authority rejected the application filed by the Board. Hence the suit was filed.

4. The defendant filed contesting written statement. According to the defendant’s case in short is that Galama Asthal was founded by Mahanth Gopal Das, brother of great grand father of this defendant. He was a Grihasth who had inherited ancestral lands. Subsequently, Gopal Das who was a Sadhu of great fame got presents from his followers and he purchased other lands. His Chela Gangaram Das also acquired some lands out of usufruct of the land left by Gopal Das. The lands about 40 - 42 Bigha were recorded in the name of Gangaram Das during last cadastral survey. He also sold 2 or 3 Bigha lands. He nominated Sukhram Das as his Chela. He also acquired some lands and sold some lands. The properties belonging to the Asthal have all along been the personal properties of Mahanth and was being utilized as such. Gopal Das became Birakt Vaisnab and he came out of his ancestral house. He installed idols of Sri Ram Janki and Laxmanji for his personal worship. He also installed idol of Saligram for his personal worship. There was neither temple nor any place for general public. Gopal Das and his followers were worshiping the deities personally. The general public had no access or have Darshan to deities. When mud wall house fell down a brick wall house with tiles over it was constructed and the deities have been kept in a room of the house.

5. The further defence is that the succession to the Gaddi of Mahanth is not guided by any specific method. After the death of Mahanth his chela succeeds and that was the custom. The general public or the villagers have no concerned with this Asthal. The Mahanths have always been celibate but they did not keep themselves completely aloof from worldly affair

Click Here to Read the rest of this document