JUDGMENT :

NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA, J.

1. Instant appeal filed by the appellant-plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) against the judgment and decree dated 12.07.2019 passed by learned Additional District Judge No. 3, Ajmer in Civil Suit No. 22/2017 (CIS No. 307/2014) titled as Shri Jain Shwetamber Shri Sangh Panjikrit Sanstha through President vs. State of Rajasthan and Others by which trial court dismissed the plaintiff’s suit for declaration and permanent injunction.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the respondents (defendants (for short ‘the defendants’) mentioning therein that the plaintiff is a representative body of Mandir Margi Sect of Jain religion in Ajmer. The suit property is situated at Ajmer consisting of 10 khasra numbers total admeasuring 10 Bighas 18 Biswas, which is surrounded by boundary wall and temple of Dadabari and Parshwanath deity, hostel, auditorium, Bhojanshala etc. were constructed there. Earlier the property was recorded in the name of ‘Mandir Margi Oswal Panchayat’ through its Mohatmim Seth Heera Chand Sancheti for last 80-90 years. In the year 1955, members of Mandir Margi Sect constituted a body in the name of plaintiff i.e. Shri Jain Shwetamber Shri Sangh and got it registered in the year 1958 to look after all the temples and religious places etc. belonging to Mandir Margi Oswal Panchayat. Subsequently, except four khasra numbers namely 3923, 3924, 3925 and 4736 measuring 2 Bighas 10 Biswas, remaining land of Khasra No. 3927, 3928, 3929, 3930, 3931, 3932 measuring 8 Bighas 8 Biswas were recorded as Sivay Chak without any court order and subsequently it was mutated in the name of UIT, Ajmer from 31.03.2004. After that, in pursuance of Government order dated 23.11.2006, the defendant No. 3 allotted the property to defendant No. 4 w.e.f. 27.11.2006 and lease deed was executed in favour of defendant No. 4 on 04.12.2006. The plaintiff had filed a revenue suit against it. These orders were without jurisdiction. So, plaintiff is not bound by these orders. After some differences, members of both subsects arrived at settlement on 21.01.1994. It was further confirmed and approved in the general body meeting dated 03.04.1994. As per the settlement, it was decided that the plaintiff will continue to manage the affairs of all the religious and charitable activities of Mandir Margi Oswal Panchayat.

3. Defendant Nos.1 to 3 filed written statement and did not specifically controvert the averments of the plaintiff but gave evasive reply. Defendant No. 4 in his written statement mentioned that registered land was donated by the then Ruler Anoraj Raja to Dada Jindutt Suri Ji who was the first Acharya of Khattargacchh Sect. It was also mentioned that the plaintiff is not successor of Mandir Margi Oswal Panchayat and compromise dated 21.01.1994 being unregistered, unstamped document, it is not acceptable by parties. So, this compromise has no evidentary value.

4. Trial court framed the following issues on the basis of pleadings of the parties:

(1) Whether the plaintiff has possession over the land mentioned in Para 1 of the plaint which was entered in the revenue record in the name of Mandir Margi Panchayat Oswal Mohatmim Seth Heera Chand Sancheti, the plaintiff’s predecessor, and in the year 1955 members of Mandir Margi Oswal Panchayat got it constituted and registered as Jain Shwetamber Shri Sangh, thus plaintiff became owner of the said property?

(2) Whether except land mention in Para 7 of the plaint out of the land mentioned in Para 1 of the plaint, land of rest khasra numbers was deleted from the name of plaintiff in the Jamabandi of 2020 without any basis and recorded as Sivay Chak?

(3) Whether mutation No. 203 and 204 dated 31.03.2004 by which land was recorded in the name of defendant No. 3 is illegal and unauthorized?

(4) Whether compromise dated 21.01.1994 was executed between plaintiff and defendant No. 4 and defendant No. 4 is bound