Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
A.C.BEHERA
Collector, Koraput – Appellant
Versus
Sunadhar Pujari – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction to the appeals and parties involved. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. case background regarding service lands and puja. (Para 4) |
| 3. defendant's arguments against plaintiff's claims. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. trial court's findings and issues framed. (Para 8 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. substantial questions of law in the second appeal. (Para 13 , 15) |
| 6. clarification on the legal status of pujaris and deities. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. conclusion on jurisdiction and maintenability of suit. (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 8. final decision and dismissal of the appeal. (Para 26) |
JUDGMENT :
Since both these Second Appeals have been preferred against an analogous confirming judgment passed by the First Appellate Court in two Appeals vide T.A. Nos.34 & 35 of 1985, then both these Appeals have taken up together for their final disposal analogously through this common judgment.
The Respondent No.4 of both the Second Appeals was the defendant No.1 in the suit vide T.S. No.33 of 1982 and was the Appellant in the First Appeal vide T.A. No.34 of 1985 and Respondent No.4 in the First Appeal vide T.A. No.35 of 1985.
3. The suit vide T.S. No.33 of 1982 was a suit for declaration and confirmation of possession.
Du
Civil courts lack jurisdiction over disputes involving religious properties when necessary parties, specifically deities, are absent; such matters should be resolved under the relevant endowment act.
The validity of a gift deed supersedes subsequent sales; individuals representing deities can sue to recover properties, affirming their legal standing to protect such interests.
A suit for declaration of title involving properties owned by deities is not maintainable without necessary parties, specifically the deities and any related institutions, according to the Orissa Hin....
A Marfatdar cannot alienate properties of deities without statutory permission; absence of necessary parties renders the suit non-maintainable.
The court established that a sale deed transferring property of a deity without proper authorization is invalid, making recovery suits unmaintainable if the deity is not a party.
The suit for title over property belonging to deities is non-maintainable if necessary parties are not joined, and alienation of such property requires statutory permission.
Properties owned by deities cannot be alienated by the Marfatdar without permission under the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowment Act, rendering related transfers void and necessitating inclusion of dei....
A deity, as a perpetual minor, can maintain a suit for injunction against alleged tenants, asserting ownership and lawful possession despite tenant claims.
The suit for declaration of title on a deity's property is invalid without the deity as a party, and sale deeds executed by the marfatdar without statutory permission are void.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
