S.C. Sharma and Virender Singh, JJ.
Surendra Singh v. Sagar Bai and others,
Writ Appeal No. 1795 of 2018 (Indore); against order dated 31.10.2018 passed in W.P. No. 3428/2017; Decided on 3.7.2019.
(1) Temple -- Lands attached to temple -- property was dedicated to deity -- deity is perpetual minor -- manager of temple has no right to transfer such land -- land transferred by manager -- sale is void.
Held: The undisputed facts as established from the record makes it very clear that the temples in question and the lands attached to the temple were recorded in the revenue records in the name of Mandir Shri Girdharnath Ji and respondent No. 4 is the Manager. It is not a case where the land is recorded in the name of respondent No. 4 or her ancestors showing existence of a temple. The property in question was dedicated to the deity and the deity is perpetual minor and by no stretch of imagination, the property could have been sold by sale deed as the deity is the title holder of the property. 2009 RN 347 (HC), 2016(2) RN 170 (HC), 2016 SCC On Line Cal. 4476, (2007)7 SCC 482 and 2008 SCC On Line Raj. 839 referred to.
(2) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M.P.) -- Ss. 109 and 110 -- entitlement of mutation -- land belonging to deity -- sold by Manager of temple -- sale is void -- purchaser not entitled for mutation -- mutation order passed by Gram Panchayat on basic of such sale deed -- is bad in law -- set aside by revenue authorities -- no interference called for.
Held: The deity is a perpetual minor and rights of the deity are to be protected by the Courts, no sale of land could have taken place in the manner and method it has been done and, therefore, the subsequent resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat for mutation of name is bad in law.
The respondent No. 4 is simply a Manager and not the title holder. The title holder is Mandir Shri Girdharnath Ji (the deity) and, therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the order passed by the revenue authorities does not warrant any interference.
(3) Sale -- Validity -- land belonging to deity -- sale by Manager of temple -- is void -- mutation order by Gram Panchayat on basis of such sale deed -- cannot be sustained -- set aside by revenue authorities. [Paras 10 to 16
(4) Uchch Nyayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 (M.P.) -- S. 2 (1) -- when interference may be made -- land belonging to deity -- dedicated to deity -- deity is juristic person holding title -- sale of such land by Manager of temple -- is void -- mutation order passed by Gram Panchayat on basis of such sale deed -- set aside by revenue authorities -- sale and mutation made by Gram Panchayat upheld by writ Court -- property belonging to deity cannot be transferred by Manager of temple -- order of writ Court set aside. [Paras 15 & 16
¼1½ eafnj & eafnj ls layXu Hkwfe & nsork dks lefiZr laifÙk dh & nsork fpjLFkk;h vo;L;d gS & eafnj ds izca/kd & dks ,slh Hkwfe dk varj.k djus dk vf/kdkj ugha & izca/kd }kjk Hkwfe foØ; dh xbZ & foØ; 'kwU; gSA
vfHkfu/kkZfjr% vfHkys[k ls ;Fkk LFkkfir rF;ksa ls vR;f/kd Li"V gS fd iz'uxr eafnj ,oa eafnj ls layXu Hkwfe jktLo vfHkys[k esa eafnj Jh fxjËkjukFk ds uke vfHkfyf[kr Fkha rFkk izR;FkhZ Øekad 4 izca/kd gSA ekeyk ,slk ugha gS fd tgk¡ fo|eku eafnj dk vfLrRo n'kkZrs gq, Hkwfe izR;FkhZ Øekad 4 ;k mlds iwoZtksa ds uke vfHkfyf[kr gksA iz'uxr laifÙk nsork dks lefiZr dh vkSj nsork fpjLFkk;h vo;Ld gS rFkk dYiuk dh fdlh Hkh mM+ku ls foØ; foys[k }kjk laifÙk dk foØ; ugha fd;k tk ldrk Fkk D;kasfd laifÙk dk gd~ /kkjd nsork gSA 2009 jk-fu- 347 ¼mPp U;k-½] 2016¼2½ jk-fu- 170 ¼mPp U;k-½] 2016 ,l lh lh vkWu ykbu dy- 4476] ¼2007½ 7 ,l lh lh 482 rFkk 2008 ,l lh lh vkWu ykbu jkt- 839 fufnZ"VA
¼2½ Hkw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-iz-½ & /kkjk 109 rFkk 110 & ukekarj.k dh gd~nkjh & nsork dh Hkwfe & eafnj ds izca/kd }kjk foØ; dh xbZ & foØ; 'kwU; gS & Øsrk ukekarj.k ds fy, gd~nkj ugha & ,sls foØ; foys[k ds vk/kkj ij & xzke iapk;r }kjk ikfjr ukekarj.k vkns'k fof/k dh n`f"V ls nks"kiw.kZ gS & jktLo vf/kdkfj;ksa }kjk vikLr fd;k x;k & gLr{ksi visf{kr ughaA
vfHkfu/kkZfjr% nsork fpjLFkk;h vo;Ld gS vkSj U;k;ky;ksa }kjk nsork ds vf/kdkjksa dh j{kk dh tkuk gksrh gS] ftl jhfr ,oa izR;FkhZ Øekad 4 izca/kd ek= gS gd~/kkjd ugha] gd~ /kkjd eafnj Jh fxj/kjukFk th ¼nsork½ gS vkSj] blfy,] bl U;k;ky; dh lqfopkfjr jk; gS fd jktLOk izkf/kdkfj;ksa }kjk ikfjr vkns'k esa gLr{ksi visf{kr ugha gSSA ¼3½ foØ; & fof/kekU;rk & nsork dh Hkwfe & eafnj ds izca/kd }kjk foØ; & 'kwU; gS & ,sls foØ; foys[k ds vk/kkj ij xzke iapk;r }kjk ukekarj.k vkns'k & dk;e ugha j[kk tk ldrk & jktLo izkf/kdkfj;ksa }kjk vikLr fd;k x;kA ¼iSjk 10 ls 16 ¼4½ mPp U;k;ky; ¼[kaM U;k;ihB dks vihy½ vf/kfu;e] 2005 ¼e-iz-½ & /kkjk 2¼1½ & gLr{ksi dc fd;k tk ldrk gS & nsork dh Hkwfe & nsork dks lefiZr & nsork gd~ /kkjd fof/kd O;fä gS & eafnj ds izca/kd }kjk ,slh Hkwfe dk foØ; & 'kwU; gS & ,sls foØ; foys[k ds vk/kkj ij xzke iapk;r }kjk ukekarj.k vkns'k ikfjr & jktLo izkf/kdkfj;ksa }kjk vikLr fd;k x;k & foØ; ,oa xzke iapk;r }kjk fd;k x;k ukekarj.k fjV U;k;ky; }kjk ekU; fd;k x;k & nsork dh laifÙk dks eafnj ds izca/kd }kjk varfjr ugha fd;k tk ldrk & fjV U;k;ky; dk vkns'k vikLr fd;k x;kA ¼iSjk 15 ,oa 16
JUDGMENT
Sharma, J.--1. The appellant before this Court has filed this Writ Appeal being aggrieved by the judgment dated 31.10.2018 passed in W.P.No. 3428/2017 (Sagar Bai and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh and another).
2. Facts of the case reveal that the respondents before this Court were claiming themselves to be the owners of Temples and the land appurtenant thereto. The agricultural land situated at Gram Bawal Nai, Tehsil Javad, District Neemuch was recorded in the revenue record in the name of Lord Shri Girdharnath Ji. The details of the land attached to the temples and recorded in the name of deity are as under :
| Survey No. | Area in Hectares |
| 423/1 | 0.575 |
| 115 | 0.177 |
| 116 | 0.355 |
| 117 | 0.329 |
| 118/1 | 0.052 |
| 118/2 | 0.052 |
| 120 | 0.533 |
| 121 | 1.859 |
3. The respondent in the present appeal, (respondent No. 4) who was the petitioner before the learned Single Judge, has filed a Civil Suit seeking declaration of title and permanent injunction with regard to the disputed temples / land attached to it. The necessity arose to file a civil suit only because the name of the petitioner / respondent No. 4 / was deleted from the revenue record as a Manager and the name of the Collector was mutated in place of respondent No. 4. The Collector was going to auction the land attached to the temple and in those circumstances a necessity arose to file a civil suit. The relevant paragraphs in the plaint preferred by the respondent No. 4 against the State Government, are as under :
;g fd] xzke ubZ ckcy esa oknh ds iSr`d oa'k ijEijkxr x`g nsork ds fuEukafdr O;fDrxr eafnj gS&
1- eafnj Hkxoku Jh fxj/kkjhukFkth
2- eafnj Hkxoku Jh firkEcjkth
3- eafnj Hkxoku Jh vEcs'oj egknsoth
;g eafnj lnSo ls oa'k ijEijk vuqlkj dwynsork ds ukrs O;fDrxr tkxhjnkj lk- ds tekus ls oknh ds oa'k }kjk iwftr gksrs gS bu eafnjksa dh iwtk dh O;oLFkk iqtkjh dh fu;qfDr iqtkjh dh fujLrh dk LoRo ges'kk ls vkt fnu rd oknh ds ifjokj }kjk gksrk pyk vk jgk gSA tkxhjnkj lk- Jh fgjsUnzflagth ds LoxZoklh gksus ds ckn okfn;k gh vius ikfjokfjd nso eafnj dh leLr O;oLFkk iqtkjh dh fu;qfDr fujLrxh djrh gSA bu eafnjksa ij okfn;k gh djrh gS o iqtkjh dks mldk ikfjJfed nsrh gSA ;g eafnj izkbosV gS ifCyd ugh gSA bu eafnjksa ls tu lk/kkj.k dk ifCyd dk dksbZ LoRo lw[kkf/kdkj O;oLFkk vkt rd ugh jgh gSA vkt Hkh okfn;k dh leLr O;oLFkk dj jgh gSA bu eafnjksa dks okni= esa vkxs dh pj.kks esa lqfo/kk gsrq oknxzLr eafnj ds uke ls lacksf/kr fd;s x;s gSA
vr% izkFkZuk gS fd oknh ds fgr esa izfroknh ds fo:) fuEukuqlkj t;i= iznku fd;k tkos %
v- ;g LoRo ?kksf"kr fd;k tkos fd oknxzLr eafnj izkbosV O;fDrxr okfn;k ds oa'k ds gS vkSj ifCyd ugh gS o budh O;oLFkk okfn;k dh gS izfroknh ftyk/;{k eanlkSj blds O;oLFkkid ugh gSA
c- ;g ?kksf"kr fd;k tkos fd 'kkldh; jsosU;q fjdkMZ esa oknxzLr eafnj ds iqtkjh ds LFkku ij tks flrkjkenkl o xCcw czkgE.k dk bUnzkt gS og xyr gS vkSj O;oLFkkid nsoLFkku ij tks ftyk/;{k eanlkSj dk uke ntZ gS og voS/k gS xyr gS o budh jsosU;q fjdkMZ [kkrk o [kljks ls de djkus dh o O;oLFkkid ds LFkku ij okfn;k dk uke fy[kkus dh okfn;k ik= gSA
l- t;sZ LkkbZ fu"ks/kkKk izfroknh dks lnSo ds fy;s jksdk tkos fd og Lo;a o vius v/khuLFk ftyk/;{kd rglhynkj lk- tkon o iVokjh gYdk ua- 36 o 47 }kjk ;k vU; }kjk oknxzLr vkjkth dh d`f"k gsrq uhyke ugh djsA
n- bl okn dk leLr O;; oknh dks izfroknh ls fnyk;k gksA
b- vU; U;k;ksfpr lgk;rk ik=rkuqlkj okfn;k dks iznku gksA
4. By a judgment dated 3.4.1991, the trial Court has granted a decree for declaration and permanent injunction and paragraph 28 of the judgment dated 3.4.1991 reads as under :
QyLo:i okfn;k dk okn izfroknh ds fo:) fMdzh fd;k tkrk gS rFkk ?kksf"kr fd;k tkrk gS fd xzke ubZ ckoy fLFkr eafnj Hkxoku Jh xksjËkuukFkth] eafnj Hkxoku Jh ihrkEcjth] eafnj Hkxoku Jh vEkjs'oj egknsoth] okfn;k ds O;fDrxr gS] ftudh O;oLFkk okfn;k dh gS ftykËkh'k eanlkSj muds O;oLFkkid ugh gSA jsosU;q fjdkMZ esa mijk
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.