B. K. Rathi, J. - (1.) This second appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree, dated 31.3.1998 passed by the Additional District Judge. Jhansi in Civil Appeal No. 45/96 arising out of Suit No. 33 of 1989. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows :
(2.) The suit was filed by the respondents against the appellant alleging that respondent No. 1 is a trust of which respondent No. 2 is Gurdian. Manager and Sewayat. That this trust was created by Smt. Jan Id Bat and her father-in-law Mathura Prasad by a gift deed dated 13.9.1938 and the zamindari land was gifted to the temple. According to that deed, Smt. Janki Bat and Mathura Prasad continued to be the Managers of the property of the temple. After the death of Mathura Prasad. Smt. Janki Bai was free to manage the property of the temple during her life-time and was also authorised to appoint some other person as guardian to manage the temple and its property. Smt. Janki Bai by registered deed, dated 9.12.1971 appointed respondent No. 2 as Manager. Guardian and Sewayat of the temple. It is alleged that thereafter the present appellant on 12.6.1978 got a deed executed from Smt. Janki Bai appointing him as manager. Thereafter he filed suit No. Deen Dayal and others v. Ram Sharan (respondent No. 2) in the Court of Munsif. Jhansi to restrain the respondent No. 1 from interfering in the management of the property of the temple by the appellant. Alternative relief sought was that in case the respondent No. 2 is found in possession, then the mandatory injunction be granted removing him from the management of the property. The relief was sought in that suit on the basis of the deed, dated 12.6.1978. The suit was ultimately decided by compromise, dated 9.7.1979, according to which it was agreed upon that respondent No. 2 will remain in possession of certain land of the trust for ten years and will harvest the crops of that land. That, thereafter, the appellant shall manage the trust in accordance to the deed, dated 12.6.1978.
(3.) It is further alleged that after the agreement, respondent No. 2 harvested the crops, but the appellant started misusing the property of the trust. Therefore, Smt. Janki Bai by notice, dated 17.1.1981 informed the appellant that deed, dated 12.6.1978 was got executed by fraud and, therefore, is cancelled. Information regarding it, was published in the newspapers. She also executed a deed on 12,6.1981 registered on 18.6.1981 cancelling the deed, dated 12.6.1978. That after cancellation of the deed, dated 12.6.1978 the appellant has no right to manage the property of the trust. The relief sought in the suit is for declaration that the appellant has no right of management of the property of the temple and that the decree of suit No. 518/78 has come to an end. The relief of permanent injunction restraining the appellant from interfering with the management of the property of the respondent was also claimed.;