- (1.) The question, which calls for consideration in this second appeal whether a female Hindu can inherit' shebaitship' of a Hindu temple? And whether she can execute a deed for management of such right in favour of her married daughter?
(2.) The plaintiff- appellant filed a suit for declaration that defendant Smt. Kampuri, widow of Shri Nandi did not have any right to inherit 'shebaitship' of Sri Thakur Brashbhanji Maharaj , an idol in a temple in village Barsana, including about 22 khotharis on the boundaries of its compound. The plaintiff alleged that these khotharies are the properties of Thakurji (the Deity), which belongs to the family of their common ancestor Shri Murlidhar, these khotharies are also used for kitchen and Bhandara of the temple, and some land in the North is used as Nohra. Shri Thakurji (the deity ) also possess agricultural land, which was recorded in consolidation operation in the name of Thakur Brashbhanji Maharaj. Apart from this declartation, the plaintiff also claimed that defendant No. 1 Smt. Kampuri did not have right to execute the documents dated 18.10.69 and 6-11-69 in favour of her daughter Smt. Mahadevi-defendant No. 2.
(3.) There is no dispute between the parties that the temple belongs to Thakurji and that they are heirs of common ancestor Shri Murlidhar. They are performing Sewa Puja and managing the properties of the deity. Thakurji. The Trial Court recorded a finding of fact that there was no reliable evidence to prove that Nandi was alive when his father Medu died, and decreed the suit. The Appellate Court, however, allowed the Appeal after recording findings that Shri Medu one of the successor in the family of Murlidhar has two sons namely Shri Ghure the plaintiff and Shri Nandi. Shri Nandi deied during life timeof his father Medu and was survived by Ghure. Ghure inherited all the interest of his late father and was mutated in village records as she had no legal right of surviverhip of Shri Medu.;