D. RAJu, C, J.—The above second appeal has been filed by the party defendants other than the State of Himachal Pradesh and their successor-in-interest against the judgment and decree passed by the learned District Judge, Solan dated 2.4.1990 in Civil Appeal No. 91/S/13 of 1985 whereunder the learned First Appellate Judge while allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Arki decreed the suit filed by respondents No. 1 to 4.

2. The suit in case No. 23/1 of 1983 came to be filed for declaration for the following reliefs : "1. Declaration to the effect that samadhi over which the temple is situated on 1 Biswas and its landed property surrounding to it, and appertinent to that of kutcha house, now demolished comprising Khewat/Khatauni No. 113/164, Khasra No. 54/1 min or 500/54 measuring 2 Biswas total land three biswas situated in chak Hatkot (Kunihar) alongwith other land of 7 Biswas, shown as Devsthan in revenue record of Hatkot (Kunihar) Tehsil Arki District Solan, Himachal Pradesh is a public property and the plaintiff/general public are owners of the same.

2. Since the defendant No. 1 failed to manage and protect the interest of the deity and the defendant No. 2 also failed to perform his duties assigned to him of worshipping etc. ceased to be the worshipper of Pujari and both defendant Nos. 1 and 2 acted adversely to the interest of the deity.

3. That the mutation of the proprietor^ right No. 1095 dated 5.6.1976 attested by the A.C. 2nd Grade, Arki as Land Reforms Officer, in favour of the defendant No. 2 is illegal, wrong, in-operative and ineffective and subsequent revenue record on the basis of the said mutation is also wrong, inoperative and ineffective qua the right/title and interest of the plaintiff/G. Public and the same be quashed.

4. That the suit land along with 7 biswas of devsthan as shown in the revenue record is a public property and the temple is a private trust that of religious nature and a scheme for its proper functioning also be settled.

5. That auction proceedings dated 15.1.1983 of Khasra No. 500/54 or 54/ 1 min measuring 2 biswas Gair Mumkin abadi situated in chak Hatkot (Kunihar) as stated above be set aside in the public interest.

6. The defendants be restrained from interfering in the suit land specially defendant No. 2 not to transfer possession of the suit land in any manner to the defendant No. 4 and the sale may not be confirmed in the interest of the public at large and the execution proceeding qua the suit land be stayed and order therein dated 10.1.1984 is not binding on the plaintiffs.

7. The defendants further also be restrained with permanent prohibitory injunction not to interfere in the suit land in any manner whatsoever through themselves, their family members, relations, friends, agents, servants etc."

3. The case of the plaintiffs is that about 300 years prior to the proceedings, the then Ruler Rana Deva of Kunihar was killed in a battle and in his memory, Rana Nand Deva temple was constructed on the land bearing Khasra No. 230 Saabka and Khasra No. 54 Hal situated in Chak Hat-Kot, Kunihar, that the public of Kunihar since then had been worshipping Rana Nand Deva as a deity uptil now and the area of about 12 Biswas was donated to the deity by the Ex-Ruler. It is claimed that in 1948 during the merger of the States, 2 Biswas of land was entered in the name of the State and 10 Biswas of land was left in the name of deity and there was one Katcha Dhara adjoining to the temple over 2 Biswas of land, which was said to have been constructed to provide free drinking water to the public who used to come to worship in the temple. The further case of the plaintiffs is that the 2nd defendant was entrusted with the duties to perform Puja in the temple and lit the lamp daily on the Samadhi and he was wrongly shown as tenant Bila Lagan Bawajah Pooja over 3 Biswas of land in Khasra No. 54 min out of the above 10 Biswas of land sa