SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(All) 3582

2010 (78) ALR 667
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
PRAFULLA C. PANT, J.
MAHANT MOHAN DAS
Versus
BIHARI D. CHHABARIYA and others
Appeal From Order No. 181 of 2009
Decided on : November 18, 2009

Advocates Appeared:
Counsel for the Appellant: L.P. Naithani, Rajendra Dobhal, D.CS. Rawat and Gopal Dutt Joshi.
Counsel for the Respondents: Sharad Sharma, Jitendra Chaudhary and Vipin Goel.

The main legal point established is that the appointment of a receiver is a discretionary remedy to protect and preserve the property in exceptional cases, based on a prima facie case and an emergency of danger or loss to the property.

Headnote:

Appointment of Receiver - Property Dispute - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order XL - Summary

Fact of the Case:

Plaintiff claimed to be trustee of a trust property and filed a suit against the defendant, seeking declaration, injunction, and accounting. Defendant denied the plaintiff's status and claimed to be the Mahant of the property.

Finding of the Court:

The Trial Court allowed the plaintiff's application for appointment of a receiver to protect and preserve the property. The defendant appealed against this decision.

Issues: Dispute over the ownership and management of the trust property, validity of the plaintiff's claim as trustee, and the defendant's claim as Mahant.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the appointment of a receiver is justified to protect the property in exceptional cases where there is a prima facie case and an emergency of danger or loss to the property. The Court also considered the rules and regulations of the Society and the disputed claims of mahantship.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, affirming the Trial Court's decision to appoint a receiver. The appointment of the two initial advocates as receivers was set aside, and a retired District Judge was appointed as the receiver. The parties were given the liberty to move an application for the replacement of the receiver if needed.

JUDGMENT

PRAFULLA C. PANT, J.-This appeal, preferred under Order XLIII, Rule (1) (s) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the order dated 23rd of May, 2009, passed by the Trial Court (Civil Judge (Senior Division, Haridwar), in Original Suit No. 254 of 2007, whereby the said Court has allowed the application under Order XL, Rule 1 of the aforesaid Code, for appointment of receiver.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused of papers on record.

3. Brief facts, giving rise to this appeal, are that plaintiff/respondent" No. 1 Bihari D. Chhabariya, claiming himself to be trustee/secretary of Maharaj Chetan Dev Awadhoot Ji Ashram Association, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Kankhal, Jawalapur, District Haridwar, instituted Suit No. 254 of 2007, against the defendant No.1 Mahant Mohan Das (present appellant), for declaration that the said defendant has no concern whatsoever with the property in suit. A decree in the nature of mandatory injunction is also sought directing the defendant No. 1 to remove his unauthorized occupation from the property in suit shown by letters QRST and IJKL (under Head 'C') at the foot of plaint. A permanent prohibitory injunction is also sought directing the defendant No.1 not to interfere in the functioning of plaintiff and defendants No.2 to 7 (respondents No.2 to 7) as members of Board of Trustees, relating to the property in suit. Lastly, it is prayed that a decree of accounting be passed against the defendant No.1 to render the accounts of the property in suit to the plaintiff and defendants No.1 to 7 (copy of the plaint is filed with the appeal).

4. It is pleaded in the plaint by the plaintiff that the plaintiff is trustee and secretary of the trust property in suit. It is further pleaded that defendant No.2 is the Chairman/trustee, defendant No.3 is the Vice-Chairman/trustee, defendant No.4 is Treasurer/trustee and defendants No.5, 6 and 7 are the other trustees of the trust property in suit shown by letters ABCDEF (under Head 'A'), MNOP (under Head 'B') IJKL and QRST (under Head 'C'), apart from the property shown under Head 'D' (at Triveni Ghat, Rishikesh), at the foot of the plaint. Property mentioned under Head' A' (shown by letters ABCDEF) was purchased by late Maharaj Chetan Dev Awadhoot Ji vide registered sale deed dated 19.9.1897. Said property was raised and developed for religious and charitable purposes. Maharaj Chetan Dev A wadhoot Ji executed a Will dated 10.3.1901, wherein it was provided that the property shall be looked after by the Board of Trustees appointed in the manner mentioned in the Will. After death of Maharaj Chetan Dev Awadhoot Ji, Board of Trustees started administering the property. In the year 1912, a Memorandum of Association was prepared after constituting a Society, and it was got registered (Registration No.190 of 1912 dated 27.7.1912) under the Registration Act. Since, the Board of "Trustees used to live at separate places they appointed initially one Swami Chidghana Nandji as Mahant to look after the property dedicated by Maharaj Chetan Dev Awadhoot Ji for the religious/charitable purposes. From time to time Mahants/managers went on changing, and finally, Swami Brahmhari was appointed Mahant/Manager by the Board of Trustees on 11.4.1980. On 30th of June, 1994, Swami Brahmhari submitted his resignation from the post of Mahant/Manager to the Board of Trustees. Where after, one S.S. Sirohi was appointed as Officer on Special Duty, and one Balram Sharma was appointed as Additional Officer on Special Duty to look after the trust property, who used to collect the rent from the tenants in the property in suit. Property shown under Head 'B' (shown by letters MNOP), is infact, part of property shown under Head 'A', which is used as 'YATRI NIWAS' (Pilgrims Residence). Property of Rishikesh shown under Head 0' in the plaint was purchased by late Swami Hari Das, who dedicated it to the trust for religious purposes. In the year 197.2, the then Mahant/Manager
































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top