- (1.) B. K. Rathi, J. This second appeal is against the judgment and decree dated 2-12-1981 passed in Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1979 by Vth Additional District Judge, Ballia. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows:
(2.) THE Suit No. 36 of 1973 was filed by the respondents in the Court of Civil Judge, Ballia for declaration and injunction. THE case of the plaintiff-respondents is that there is math in the village mauza Bairia, Pargana Deaba, District Ballia which belong to Dasnami Shankara Charya Sampardaya. THE owner of the math is Lord Srinath Jee, who is installed in the building of the math. According to the directions of Dasnami Shankara Charya Sampardaya every mahant should belong to duiz vansh. THE math is the chartiable and religious trust and its entire property is endowed and dedicated. THE mahant of the math manages the property for and on behalf of Srinath Jee as sarbarakar. It is further alleged that one Basdeo Giri was the mahant of the math. He had no chela. Therefore, the defendant claimed himself to be chela of math, but he could not be chela in accordance with the directions of the religious books as he is married person and got sons also. There was no mahant of the math and therefore, people of the village formed a committee of the plaintiffs to manage the affairs of the math. It was further alleged that the defendant fraudulently obtained will from mahant Basdeo Giri on 13-4- 1967 and 12-5-1967 which were cancelled by Basdeo Giri on 14-6-1967 and by that document he authorised the managing committee of the plaintiffs to manage the affairs of the math. The defendant fraudulently again obtained another will of Basdeo Giri on 2-9-1967 but it was again cancelled by Basdeo Giri. That, therefore, the plaintiffs respondents have right to manage the affairs of the math. Basdeo Giri died in June, 1968 and since then the plaintiffs are managing the entire property of the math had the agricultural land of the same.
(3.) THE proceedings under Section 145 Cr. P. C. also started. THErefore, the plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration that they are sarvarakar of the math and for injunction to restrain the appellant from interfering in their working as mahant of the math. The appellant contested the suit and alleged that the plaintiffs were never appointed as mahant of the math and never managed the math. The rights of the parties have already been decided under the consolidation proceedings and the same operate as res judicata.;