The executing court has the jurisdiction to direct the removal of an object that was placed in a temple in violation of a decree, even if the decree is for prohibitory injunction.

1. - Both these revision petitions are directed against the order dated 19.1.1978 passed by the Civil Judge, Bhilwara in original execution case No. 82/73.

2. The facts, briefly stated, are as under. In village Paroli in District Bhilwara there is a temple known as the temple of Shree Adeshwarji and the idol of Shree Adeshwarji the first Jain Tirthankar, is in the said temple. A dispute arose between the members belonging to the Digamber sect of the Jain religion and the members belonging to the Swetamber sect of the said religion with regard to the right to worship in the said temple. On 1st June, 1954, Shri Kesrimal (petitioner in S.B.Civil revision petition No. 179/1978) and Kistoor Chand, Dharam Chand, Bhuralal, Maganlal, Gundalal Gulab Chand and Pyar Chand, non-petitioners Nos.5-12 in S.B.Civil Revision petition No. 179/78 here in after referred to as the "plaintiff decree holders," belonging to the Digamber Jain sect, filed a representative suit on behalf of the members of the Digamber Sampradaya in the court of Civil Judge, Bhilwara against Ugma Singh, Nathulal, Mishrilal and Kistoor Chand (non-petitioners Nos. 1-4 in S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 179/1979) here in after referred to as the defendant judgment debtors belonging to the Swetamber Sampradaya. In the said suit the plaintiff decree holders prayed for a declaration that they have been carrying on and and are entitled to carry on the Darshan, Prakshal and Poojan etc. according to the tenets observed by the Digamber Jain sect without interference from any body and also prayed that the defendants be restrained by means of a permanent injunction from erecting the 'Dhwaja Dand' and putting up the 'Kalash' and enclosing the idols by putting doors and locks or any other manner and interfering with or altering the nature, shape and appearance of the idols installed in the temple and in any other manner directly or indirectly doing any act or thing which may have the effect of wounding the religious feelings and sentiments of the followers of the Digamber Jain sect and interfere with the free and unfettered exercise of plaintiffs' rights for affording Darshan, Prakshal and Poojan and other rites according to Digamber Jain tenets of religion. The said suit was decreed by the Civil Judge, Bhilwara by his judgment and decree dated 5th June, 1957. The Civil Judge passed a decree in the following terms:

fMdzh bLrdjkfj;k cgd eqnb;ku cgSfl;r uqekbZUnku nhxLcj tSu lEiznk; cf[kykQ eqn~njkykbe cgSfl;r vly uqekbUnxku 'osrkEcj tSu lEiznk; bl vej fd lfnj gS fd gLrdkj bl vej dk fd;k tkrk gS Afd eqn~nb;ku ;kfu nhxEcj lEiznk; tkos Jh vkns'ojkukFk th ds efUnj o fdpkjkSyh dh iwtk i{kikr o izn'kZu viuh viuh lEiznk; ds mlwy ds eqrkfcd djrs jgs gS vkSj vkbUnk djus ds etkt gSA gqDe bErsukbZnckeh cjf[kykQ eqn~nk;yge cgSfl;r eln o uqekbUnxku 'osrkEcj tSu lEiznk; bl vej dk lkfnj gksos eqn~nk;ykge Jh vkns'kojukFk th dh ewfrZ ds us= HkqtcUn o eqdqV oxSjk yxk dj ewfrZ dh ekStqnk 'kdy o lwjr es dksbZ rCnhyh u djs vkSj efUnj eqruktk ij /otknUM o dy'k u yxkos vkSj efUnj ds fdokM+h ij rkyk u yxkus vkSj nZkxEcj lEiznk; ds yksxks dks n'kZu iwtk iz{kky nhxEcj /keZ ds vuqlkj djus ls u jksds [kpkZ eqn~n;bku cftEek eqn~nk;yge vk;n gh lhy ckn rdehy crjrh o nkf[ky nQrj gksA rkjh[k % 5&6&57

3. On appeal, the District Judge, Bhilwara dismissed the suit on the ground that no question of any right to property or office was involved. This Courts on second appeal, set aside the aforesaid judgment and decree passed by the District Judge Bhilwara and held that the allegations in the plaint related to an assertion of a right to worship and an interference with that right and that a dispute of civil nature arose which is clearly cognizable by a Civil Court. The High Court, therefore, remanded the case to the District Judge, Bhilwara, for determining the appeal on merits. After remand the District Judge, Bhilwara, affirmed the judgment and decree of the Civil Judge but that part of the decree whereby the defe