1. This appeal has been filed by Hardwari Lal (deceased through LR) against the order dated 18th May, 1987 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Delhi whereby in a reference made under Section 30/31 of the Land Acquisition Act for apportionment of compensation of land bearing Khasra No.7/3(2-4), 8 (4-16) in total 7 bighas situated Village Rithala, Delhi.

2. The facts are that on 22.7.1968, an application for correction of the revenue record was filed by the appellant in the court of the Revenue Assistant, Delhi alleging that he was the Bhumidar of Khasra No. 710/188 measuring 1 bigha and 12 biswas. The actual possession of the land, however was with respondent who was not ready to hand over the possession to the appellant. There was another plot number 17 adjacent to the above land which was also occupied by Rai Singh. He stated that he be delivered possession of the plot measuring 1 bigha 12 biswas and necessary demarcation of the land be also carried out.

3. The application was referred to the Tehsildar for necessary enquiry and in the report filed after recording the evidence of both the parties it was stated that on 14.10.1968, the land was not being used for cultivation for the last 15 years upon which now stands a temple. The learned Revenue Assistant after hearing both the parties vide his order dated 16.8.1969 rejected the application of the appellant.

4. Aggrieved by the above said order, the appellant preferred an appeal in the court of Additional Collector, Delhi, which was also dismissed and the order of Revenue Assistant was upheld. The findings given in those decisions were conclusive as the appellant had not preferred any appeal against the said orders.

5. Thereafter the appellant filed a reference under Section 30/31 of the Land Acquisition Act for apportionment of compensation of the land before the Additional District Judge.

6. The notices to the said reference were issued to the interesting parties. The appellant had claimed compensation on the ground of his being Bhumidar of the land. On the other hand respondent has claimed compensation on the ground that the land was under a temple which was used for charitable purposes. Previous khasra No. of this land was 710/188 measuring 1 bigha 12 biswas. The land was of superior class. So this land was allotted in lieu of that previous khasra No. The present Khasra Nos. were allotted to the same land in consolidation proceedings. He has further submitted that the land formed a part of the Shiv Mandir and the same was donated in the year 1952-53 by Smt. Chander Kali widow of late Siri Chand and Smt. Bhariyan Widow of late Raja Singh to the said Temple for charitable purposes and the same has been used for the charitable purposes only since then.

7. Both the parties led their evidence before the Additional District Judge, who disposed of the said reference under Section 30/31 of the Land Acquisition Act and have given his finding in para 7 of the impugned order which reads as under:- I have gone through the record. It is admitted by I.P. 1 that previously Khasra no. Of the land was 710/188 and after consolidation the present Khasra No. was allotted in lieu thereof. Land was not cultivated nor possessed by Hardwari Lal as is clear from the judgment of the Court of Shr. Dharam Dutt, Add. Collector, Delhi, dated 7.2.70. Khasra girdwari was entered in the name of the temple. The property was used for chartitable purposes for more than 30 years. So I.P. 1 has no right to receive compensation of the land inquestion. Only temple is entitled to receive the compensation. Rai Singh I.P. 2 has claimed compensation on behalf of the temple. The purpose of the trust has ceased because the land has been acquired and there is no temple in existence at present. The parties disputed about the existence of the trust through Rail Singh and others have got it registered in Dec. 1986 u/s 92 of C.P.C. the court can frame policy for the execution of the trust. M