Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
A.V. Chandrashekara, J.
Sanjeeva Murthy S.R. & Anr. —Petitioners
versus
Assistant Commissioner, Madhugiri Sub-Division, Madhugiri & Ors. —Respondents
Writ Petition Nos.56746, 56747 and 58257 to 58259 of 2014 (GM-CPC)
Decided on 17.7.2015
For the Petitioners:Smt. S.R. Anuradha, Advocate
For the Respondents:Smt. Anitha, High Court Government Pleader, Sri N. Kumar and Sri R.S. Ravi, Advocates
IMPORTANT POINT
In case of vacancy arising in the management Committee, the Principal District Judge can fill up the vacancy after calling appropriate names from the Assistant Commissioner and Sub-Divisional Officer and then fill up vacancy after full satisfaction without holding vacancy.
Headnote:Civil Procedure Code 1908—Section 92 read with Order 7 Rule 1 – Suit on behalf of members of Lauder Community – Final decree passed on the basis of compromise – Latter two members of the Committee died and accordingly a Committee was formed and two members selected to fill up the vacancy – Held Principal District Judge, is competent to direct the Assistant Commissioner or Sub Divisional Officer to send a penal of five names and out of five names, the Principal District Judge can choose the names to fill up the vacancy after satisfying himself about the credential of such members. (Paras 9 to 13)
Facts of the case
A suit was filed under Section 92 read with Order 7 Rule 1 CPC on behalf of member of Lauder Community for declaration to the fact that right of management of two temples and immovable properties attached to the temple Vests in the Community constituted by the devotees. Said suit was decided on the basis of compromise between the parties. After some time two members of the Committee died and on the application, Principal District Judge appointed the applicant who was nephew of the deceased which was challenged. The question was whether holding of election to select the two trustees would be proper and advisable.
Findings of the Court
Held the method adopted by the Principal District Judge, would be proper method and would serve the purpose of members of the Community and temple and properties attached therein. Holding of election to select the trustees would create many problems. Therefore, the Principal district Judge could direct Assistant Commissioner, and Sub-Divisional Officer to send penal of five names and out of five names Learned Principal District Judge could choose the names to fill up the vacancy after satisfying himself about the credential of such members.
Result: Petition disposed off.
A.V. Chandrashekara, J.—Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. With their consent, the matter is taken up for final hearing.
2. The facts leading to filing of the impugned order dated 15-11-2014 in an scheme suit bearing O.S. No. 21 of 1949-1950 pending on the file of Court of the District Judge, Bangalore as follows:
Two persons by name Seebaiah and Narasimaiah had filed a scheme suit under Section 92 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 relating to the management of two temples namely Bhuvaneshwari Temple and Anjaneyaswamy Temple which are situated in the Sira Taluk and properties belonging to these two temples as described in the Schedules (a) and (b) appended to the plaint.
3. The suit came to be filed in terms of Section 92 read with Order 7, Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 on behalf of the members of the Lauder Community for declaration to the effect that right of management of two temples situated in Sira Taluk and immovable properties attached to those temples vests in the community constituted by the devotees at the meeting held on 22-10-1946. The said suit came to be filed against 6 persons namely Lakshmana Rao, Yellappa, Yelu N agappa, Siddappa, Venkatappa Subbaiah. Further, reliefs had been sought for appointment of proper trustees for the management of the trust and the property and directing enquiries and accounts if necessary and to grant such other relief. Ultimately, the said suit ended in a compromise. On the basis of the compromise petition filed, decree came to be passed on 7-9-1951 by the then learned Principal District Judge with the following terms:
It is ordered and decreed that the suit be and is hereby decreed in the terms of the said compromise petition a copy whereof is annexed hereto:
(1) That the first defendant-Lakshman Rao, second plaintiff-Narasimhaiah and the Sub-Division Officer, Madhugiri Sub-Division, shall constitute the committee of management of suit ‘A’ and ‘B’ Schedule properties and that the properties do and is hereby ordered to be vested in the committee of Trustees.
(2) That the committee shall have power to appoint the archak or archaks of the ‘A’ Schedule temple, who will manage the ‘B’ Schedule properties and that the said archak or archaks shall be under the control and supervision of the above said committee of management.
(3) That the aforesaid committee of management shall have power to remove any or both the archaks if they do not perform their duties properly and satisfactorily.
(4) That the parties may apply to the Court by means of an application for suitable directions in regard to management, if need be.
(5) That all proceedings held and all acts done hither to by the committee of management formed on 22-10-1945 alleged and referred to in Para 4 of the plaint shall have no effect whatever; and
(6) That in case of death or disabilities of any of the trustees, the Court shall have power to fill in the vacancy so caused.
It is further ordered and decreed that the parties to the suit do bear their own costs of the suit.
Given under my hand and the seal of the Court 7th day of September, 1951.
4. Consequent upon the compromise entered into between the parties therein, and same being accepted by the then learned Principal District Judge, a committee was appointed which was inclusive of defendant 1- Lakshmana Rao and plaintiff 2-Narasimhaiah to manage the suit schedules (a) and (b) properties and Revenue Sub-Divisional Officer of Madhugiri, Sub-Division would be the ex officio trustee of the Committee constituted for the management of the temples and schedule property.
5. After sometime, Lakshmana Rao died and Ramanna nephew of Lakshman Rao made an application to the learned Principal District Judge to come on record as member of the Managing Committee and that application was considered in detail on 21-4-1973. The then learned Principal District Judge satisfying himself with the credentials of Ramanna, appointed Sri Ramanna as trustee of the Managing Committee. This was
