IDOL MURLI MANOHARJI Vs. GOPILAL GARG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -

(2.) THIS is a plaintiff's second appeal. The plaintiff Idol Shri Murli Manoharji through Chandra Shekhar minor represented by his next friend Smt. Radha Devi filed the suit on of which this appeal arises on 15-12-1960 in the Court of Sub-Judge, First Class, Ajmer alleging that the temple, situated in Mohalla Kesarganj in the city of Ajmer known by the name of Shri Murli Manoharji's temple was built by Ramnarayan, who is the common ancestor of Chandra Shekhar and defendants Nos. 2 to 4 Shive Shanker, Kanhaiyalal and Ramchander, The plaintiff's case is that the idols of Shri Radha Krishan and Shri Mahadeo were installed in this temple and Pratistha ceremony was also duly performed. It was further alleged that land measuring 66'x91' was acquired by Ramnarayan from the Municipal Committee, Ajmer with the object of constructing a temple on it, in the year 1888 A. D. The temple was built on a portion of the said land and residential houses, a well and six shops behind the temple were constructed from time to time. The whole of the property including the houses, shops and the well, according to the plaintiff, were dedicated to the idols of Shri Radha Krishan and whatever income was derived from the property was being utilised for Sewapuja of the idols. It was also alleged that in Smt. 1972 the idol of Radha Krishan was replaced by that of Shri Murli Manoharji after the performance of the Pratistha. It is further stated in the plaint that the defendant No. 2 Shive Shanker and defendants Nos. 3 and 4 who are the sons and grandsons of Ramnarayan respectively started acting against the interest of the idol and partitioned the property belonging to the idol and also mortgaged a portion of the building to defendants Nos. 5 to 7. The plaintiff goes on to state that the defendant No. 1 Dr. Gopilal Garg, and defendants Nos. 8 to 10 in execution of the decree obtained by them against the defendants Nos. 2 to 4 also got the building in question attached except the portions in which the idols of Shri Murli Manoharji and Mahadeo are installed, and proceedings for sale of the same were being taken On these allegations it was prayed that a decree may be passed in the plaintiffs 's favour declaring that the plaintiff is the owner of the property in question which is not liable to attachment and sale in execution of any decree passed against the defendants Nos. 2 to 4 and further that all the alienations made by the defendants Nos. 2 to 4 in respect of the property be declared null and void.

(3.) IN Koowar Doorganath Roy vs. Ram Chander Sen (3) it was held that in absence of a document of endowment very strong and clear evidence of such endowment ought to exist. A strong presumption was drawn in the aforesaid case from the conduct of the parties in treating the suit property as their private property for the purpose of holding that the property was not debutter.