PRIYADARSHINI, Member –This is an appeal filed u/Sec. 224 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (In short ``the Act) against the judgment and decree of Revenue Appellate Authority, Alwar dated 26.6.93, whereby the first appeal preferred by the respondent No.1 to 3 was accepted and the judgment and decree of the trial court dated 8.10.90 were set-aside.

(2). The brief facts, necessary for decision of this appeal, are that a revenue suit for declaration of khatedari rights and permanent injunction was filed by the Villagers on behalf of appellants No. 1 & 2 with the averment that the plaintiffs are khatedar tenants of agriculture land bearing Khasra No. 231, 232, 235 to 241, 469, 507, 508 and 509 measuring 41.13 bighas situated in the precinct of Village Rampura Patan and this land was given as muafi to both the temples and it was khudkast land of the plaintiffs-appellants. The defendants- respondents No.1 to 3 were pujaris of both the idols and they were managing the worship and cultivation of the suit land of the deities, and also the suit land was in possession of the Pujaris on behalf of the deities. It was further stated that the defendants took undue advantage of their position and got the suit land recorded in their own names in collusion with the officials of the revenue department and they have started misuse of the income from the said agriculture land to their personal advantage. The villagers are worshipping both the idols and religious feelings of the villagers have been hurt by the action of the defendants. Therefore, it had become necessary to bring the suit. It was also stated that the management of worship to the deities will not be possible if the defendants transferred the land to other persons. The plaintiffs approached the defendants but they have refused to get the entries corrected in the revenue records. It was, therefore, prayed that the appellants-plaintiffs No. 1 & 2 be declared khatedar tenants of the suit land and also prayed for permanent injunction against the defendants-respondents No. 1 to 3.

(3). The defendants-respondents opposed the suit by way of written statement and contended that the suit land was not khudkast land of the plaintiffs-appellants and it was submitted that the defendants No.1 to 3 were khatedar tenants of the suit land from the time of their ancestors and the defendants got the suit land by way of inheritance. It was further stated that one- third share in the suit land was sold by defendant Charan Das and father of defendant Bhuvaneshwar Das to defendant No. 2 Ramswaroop by way of registered sale deed on 15.6.67. Later on the suit land was partitioned between the defendants and they are in separate possession of their share. The defendant No.2 Ramswaroop is not pujari of the temple, although defendants No.1 & 3 have admitted that they and their ancestors were pujaris of the plaintiff-appellants temples, but the suit land was never a muafi land and it had no concern whatsoever with the plaintiffs (Temples). The defendants were never in possession of the land as Pujaris of the temples, but they were khatedar tenants of the suit land.

(4). On the pleadings of the parties the learned trial court framed eight issues and after recording evidence of the parties and affording them an opportunity of hearing, the suit filed by the appellant-plaintiffs was decreed and the deities were declared as khatedar tenants of the disputed lad. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the trial court, Respondents No.1 to 3 filed first appeal before Revenue Appellate Authority, Alwar which was accepted by the impugned judgment dated 26.6.93 and the judgment and decree of the trial court was set-aside on three grounds holding that old and new khasra numbers are not consistent, that the entries were not changed during the settlement operation, but names of the pujaris were recorded in the revenue records in Smt. 2018 and that the villagers are not competent to bring the suit on behalf of the deities. Henc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document