ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA,J. - (1.) This appeal is by the defendant, arising out of Original Suit No. 342 of 1957, filed by the plaintiffs for demolition of construction standing on the Suit property and to restore possession thereof to the plaintiffs', which got decreed on 28.2.1977.
(2.) Plaintiffs, who are 10 in number, claim to be the members of the committee of management of a trust, alleged to have been created on 22.1.1957, and registered on 23.1.1957, by defendant no. 4. It is alleged that the property in issue, had devolved upon the Qazies, pursuant to a Sanad issued by ruler of Bundelkhand namely Maharaja Chhatrapal Singh Judev on 14.7.1874 in favour of one Abdul Latif who was a Qazi. The Sanad is Exb. 6 and is marked as Paper No. 60-C. It records that Abdul Latif was made Qazi by virtue of said Sanad. It is claimed that the entire property, which now forms part of Mohalla Qazipura was orally gifted to Abdul Latif. The plaint allegations are that in such circumstances, the Qazies continued to remain in possession over the suit property and the entire Qazipura Mohalla and various houses, Masjid, Mazar etc. came to be constructed over it. As per the plaint, suit property specified by letters A,B,C,D measures 55ft X 50ft. and letters E,F,G,H measuring 15ft x 10ft had passed on to Qazies from generation to generation, pursuant to the original grant (Sanad) and the same was being used for religious purposes and had assumed shape of a waqf. According to the plaint, on 23.1.1957, a trust was created by defendant no. 4, in which the plaintiffs were made members of the committee of management, and authorised to manage the suit property. It was claimed that the defendants have no right or authority over the suit property but have unauthorised encroached upon it, and have raised construction of certain shops. Demolition of illegal construction and possession is thus claimed.
(3.) The defendant contested the suit, denying plaintiffs' right over the property or their right to institute suit, and instead claimed right over the suit property on the basis of a lease/ patta executed by the then Zamindar. It was stated that the defendants are in possession over the suit property since long and various shops belonging to them are in existence. It was also alleged that date of dispossession is not specified and the suit is otherwise barred by limitation.;