Back
High Court of Allahabad
S.K.Dhaon, J.
Kunwar Singh
Vs.
Sri Thakurji Mahraj
Second Appeal No. 2461 of 1976
Decided On : Feb 10, 1992
AGRICULTURAL LAND - SALE DEED - CANCELLATION - POSSESSION - U. P. ZAMINDARI ABOLITION AND LAND REFORMS ACT, 1950 - SECTION 240G - COMPROMISE - BINDING EFFECT - U. P. CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS ACT - SECTION 49 - BAR OF SUIT - TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882 - SECTION 41 - APPLICABILITY - JURISDICTION OF CIVIL COURT - SECTION 331 (1-A) - FAILURE OF JUSTICE.
Fact of the Case:
Plaintiff, a Hindu temple, filed a suit for cancellation of a sale deed executed by Jagan Nath Dass, the then Mahant of the temple, in favor of the defendants. The temple claimed ownership of the agricultural plots in dispute, which were recorded as sir land in the revenue records. Jagan Nath Dass had obtained a bhumidhari sanad for the plots and subsequently sold them to the defendants.
Finding of the Court:
The trial court dismissed the suit, but the lower appellate court reversed the decision and decreed the suit in favor of the temple. The appellate court found that Jagan Nath Dass was not the chela of Dhiram Dass, the previous Mahant, and that he had no right to sell or mortgage the temple's property. The court also held that the compromise entered into between Jagan Nath Dass and Ganga Nandan, the previous Sarbarkar of the temple, in proceedings under section 240G of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, was binding on Jagan Nath Dass and prevented him from claiming any interest in the plots in dispute.
Issues: 1. Whether Jagan Nath Dass was the chela of Dhiram Dass and had the right to sell or mortgage the temple's property? 2. Whether the compromise entered into between Jagan Nath Dass and Ganga Nandan in proceedings under section 240G of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, was binding on Jagan Nath Dass? 3. Whether the suit was barred by section 49 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act? 4. Whether the defendants were bonafide transferees for valuable consideration under section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882? 5. Whether the Civil Court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court found that there was no reliable evidence to establish that Jagan Nath Dass was the chela of Dhiram Dass. The compromise entered into between Jagan Nath Dass and Ganga Nandan in proceedings under section 240G of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, was binding on Jagan Nath Dass and prevented him from claiming any interest in the plots in dispute. The court held that the suit was not barred by section 49 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, as Jagan Nath Dass had accepted to be a defacto Mahant and could not take advantage of the said provision. The court also held that the defendants were not bonafide transferees for valuable consideration under section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, as the real owner of the property was the deity and a deity cannot give its consent to a transfer. The court further held that the Civil Court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit under section 331 (1-A) of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, as there was no failure of justice.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the decree of the lower appellate court was upheld.
S. K. Dhaon, J.
1. This is a defendant's Second Appeal. The trial court on 30th April, 1974 dismissed suit no. 60 of 1971 in which the plaintiff claimed the cancellation of a sale deed dated 27th May 1969 with respect to certain agricultural plots and also the delivery of the possession of the said plots after the ejectment of the defendants. The other usual reliefs were also claimed. The lower appellate court by its judgment and decree dated 3rd December, 1976 reversed the decree of the trial court and decreed the suit.
2. The material averments in the plaint are these. One Thakur Jodha Singh was the zamindar. He owned Sir land. During his life time he created a public trust by means of a registered waqf deed dated 24th September, 1934 whereby he endowed his sir land, which formed part of agricultural plots (hereinafter referred to as the plots in dispute; in favour of the plaintiff (Sri Thakurji Mahraj Birajman Mandir) for the maintenance and upkeep etc. of the temple and the Bhog expenses of the plaintiff The plots m dispute were recorded in the revenue papers as the sir of the plaintiff. During his life time Thakur Jodha Singh remained the Manager of the temple and thereafter amongst others Ganga Nandan Chela Bramha Nandan became the Manager. The plots in dispute were cultivated by the Managers on behalf of the plaintiff Preceding Baba Sant Ram Dass, the present Mahant and Sarbarkar of the plaintiff, Jagan Nath Dass was the Mahant and Sarbarkar of the plaintiff. On 27th May, 1969 Jagan Nath Dass executed a sale deed and transferred the pilots in dispute to the defendants for an alleged consideration of Rs. 30.000/-. The plots in dispute measured 33 bighas, 18 biswas and 10 biswansis. During the tenure of managership of Ganga Nandan, Jagan Nath Dass with the connivance of the Lekhpal got his name entered in the Khasra record On acquiring this knowledge, Ganga Nandan moved an application in the form of objection before the Sub Divisional Officer concerned under section 240 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in compensation proceedings. This case was registered as case no. 157 of 1957 (Ganga Nandan v. Jagan Nath Dass). In the said case, a compromise was arrived at on 21st December, 1957 in which Jagan Nath Dass admitted the title of the plaintiff. He agreed to manage the plots in dispute as the Manager of the temple without any right to sell or mortgage the same. This compromise was duly executed by the parties and was filed in the case. It was duly recorded and the proceedings were disposed of by an order dated 21st December 1957 in terms of the compromise. The said compromise was acted upon thereafter. Jagan Nath Dass continued to be the Mahant and Sarbarkar of the plaintiff from the date of the said compromise. After some time he became dishonest and manoeuvred to get the plots in dispute recorded in his personal name in the revenue records. He obtained a Bhumidhari Sanad with respect to the said plots and thereafter executed the impugned sale deed. On these facts coming to light the Hindu Public of the village concerned removed Jagan Nath Dass; from Mahantship and duly appointed Baba Sant Ram Dass as Mahant and. Sarbarkar of the plaintiff. Jagan Nath Dass died in January, 1971.
The defendants filed a common written statement. In it, the material averments are these. Jagan Nath Dass was the Sirdar of the plots in dispute in his own right and he not only continued to be recorded as such but also continued to be in possession over the plots in dispute. The village where the plots in dispute were situated, was brought under consolidation operation and in those proceedings [he was recorded sirdar of the plots in dispute. He was also issued CH Form no. 45 and those proceedings became final. The plaintiff did not raise any objection in the consolidation proceedings The suit is, therefore barred under section 27 read with section 49 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdin
AI
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
