A suit for declaration and injunction is not maintainable where the plaintiff is not in possession of the property or in control of the management of the institution in question and could have sought further relief, such as possession.

P.D.Sharma, J.

1. The D. A. V. College Hoshiarpur Society, plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the Society) brought the present suit for a declaration that the Society was the owner and in possession of the management of the Sarvada Nand Anglo Sanskrit Higher Secondary School, Bassi Kalan, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur and the Sarvada Nand Anglo Sanskrit Higher Secondary School Managing Committee, defendant (hereinafter referred to as the committee), had nothing to do with the School or the management thereof and by way of consequential relief prayed for an injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiffs possession of management of the School.

The Society alleged that it founded the D. A. V. Middle School, Bassi Kalan in 1915 which later on was named as the Sarvada Nand Anglo Sanskrit Middle School at village Bassi Kalan, district Hoshiarpur and in due course was raised to the standard of a Higher Secondary School. It was further alleged that the Society acquired the land over which the buildings were constructed by it out of its own funds and thus the School building and the site under it belonged to it. The plaintiff went on to state that on 4th July 1963 an unruly mob assaulted the Principal of the School and belaboured Balbir Singh, the President of the Society also when he went to the rescue of the Principal.

On 9th July 1963 the plaintiff received a letter from Jagan Nath to the effect that by resolution, dated 20th of June 1963 a few local residents had founded a society as Sarvada Nand Anglo Sanskrit Higher Secondary School Managing Committee, Bassi Kalan, the defendant and got it registered under the Registration of Societies Act which had decided to take management of the School in its own hands. The plaintiff urged that the said Committee had no connection with the School and as such was not entitled to take possession of the management thereof and had unlawfully deprived it from the ownership of the School building and other property.

2. The defendant resisted the above claim and in doing so pleaded that Balbir Singh, President of the D. A. V. College Society had not been authorised by the Society to institute the suit or to incur any expenditure in this connection and that it was in possession and in charge of the management of the School and as such the suit for mere declaration and injunction was not competent which should have been for possession of the management and the buildings on payment of proper Court-fee. The defendant further averred that site of the school building was acquired by it and the School building as well was constructed out of its funds and that the plaintiff-society was incorrect in stating that the said land was acquired by it and the building also was constructed at its cost. It was also averred that the services of Om Parkash Bagga, Principal were rightly terminated by the Committee. It was further averred that the defendant-committee was the only organisation legally entitled to the property and management of the School and that being so there was no question of its interference with the alleged management of the School by the plaintiff-society. The trial Judge framed the following issues:-

-

1. Whether the plaint has been properly valued for the purposes of Court-fee and jurisdiction ?

2. Whether Shri Balbir Singh has been duly authorised and as such, has locus stand! to bring the suit ?

3. Whether the plaintiffs suit for declaration and injunction, as consequential relief is maintainable in the present form in view of the objections in the written statement ?

4. Whether the plaintiff, as such, can file the suit?

5. What is the effect of the proceedings under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code between me parties

6. Whether the plaintiff is the owner of the School building and site under it ?

6-A. Whether the plaintiff is the owner and is in possession of the management of the Sarvada Nand Anglo Sanskrit Higher Secondary school, Bassi Kalan ?

7. R