Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal, J.- Heard Sri Siddharth Nandan, learned counsel for the plaintiff appellant.

2. Plaintiff appellant by a registered gift deed dated 1.4.2008 gifted the temple in question in favour of the Governor of U.P.

3. Later, he filed a suit for cancellation of the aforesaid gift deed on the allegation that he has nothing to do with the management of the temple and as such had no authority to make a gift of the same and therefore the same is liable to be cancelled and declared null and void and that no construction on the property of the temple be made by the respondents. In the suit Governor, U.P. as well as the State of U.P., through Collector and Block Development Officer, Campearganj, district -Gorakhpur were arrayed as defendants.

4. On behalf of the respondents an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was moved for rejecting the plaint as the suit was not maintainable and was barred by Article 361(4) of the Constitution of India. The said application was allowed and the plaint was rejected vide order dated 23rd February 2010. The appeal of the plaintiff appellant against the said order has also been dismissed by the lower appellate court vide judgment and order da

Click Here to Read the rest of this document