J.V. Gupta, CJ. - (1.) This is-plaintiff s second appeal whose suit for permanent injunction has been dismissed by both the Courts below.
(2.) The facts leading to the filing of this appeal are that there is a temple known as 'Mandir of Shri Gopal Ji' in Village Silothi, tehsil Palwal, which is in existence since the time immemorial and the idol of Shri Gopal Ji stands installed in the same. This temple is a religious trust of Public nature and the idol of Shri Gopal Ji is worshipped by every Hindu belonging to Sanatan Dharam sect and they also make their offerings to it on every occasion. The proprietors of the village had granted Doli rights with regard to the agricultural land before the year 1880 and, therefore, the land in dispute is recorded in Doli rights of the said temple and is in possession of the said idol which has acquired the ownership right over it by way of adverse possession. This temple belongs to Raman andi Bhekh. The Plaintiff Bhajan Dass claiming himself to be Chela of Ganga Dass and Manager of the said temple had filed the present suit for permanent injunction and in the alternative for possession alleging that the defendants with a view to grab and usurp all the movable and immovable properties of the said temple, forcibly locked the main room of the temple. When he asked them to vacate the same, they refused to do the same. The suit was contested, inter alia, on the plea that the plaintiff has no locus standi to file the suit; it could only be filed by the Idol of Shri Gopal Ji. The Gram Panchayat is recorded as the owner of the suit property and for the same it was necessary party for just decision of the case. The present suit is also barred under section 77 of the Tenancy Act and that the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to try this suit as plaintiff has pleaded tenancy rights in respect of the suit land. The suit is also barred by the principles of res judicata as the plaintiff had filed the suit for obtaining occupancy rights regarding the suit land which was dismissed by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Palwal, in the year 1971. A plea was also taken that the plaintiff did not seek permission under section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure prior to the institution of the suit. The plaintiff was not the manager of the temple as claimed. He only worked as Pujari up till 1970, when he was ousted from the temple of Shri Gopal Ji by the proprietors of the village, who are the real owners of the suit property. Thereafter, the affairs of the temple were taken over by the Gram Panchayat. The trial Court found that the plaintiff had failed to prove himself to be Mahanat of Mandir Shri Gopal Ji, though it was admitted by the defendant that the plaintiff has been a Pujari of the temple up to 1970, when he was ousted by the proprietors of the Village. According to the trial Court, the plaintiff has brought this suit in his personal capacity in spite of the fact that in the plaint he has pleaded that the idol of Shri Gopal Ji is the Dohlidar and is in possession of the suit land, through him, to the extent of land measuring 108 Kanals 12 marlas. Since the Idol of Shri Gopal Ji is juristic person it had got legal entity and it can sue and be sued in its own name. The trial Court ultimately held that "the plaintiff has failed to prove that he is the Mahant of Mandir Shri Gopal Ji and for the same, he was not entitled to recover the possession of the land, which is Dohli tenure with this temple, nor was he entitled to recover the possession of the other articles of the temple, which allegedly have been taken into possession by the defendants. Consequently, the plaintiff's suit was dismissed vide judgment dated 20th November, 1975. In appeal, the learned District Judge, Gurgaon, affirmed the said finding of the trial Court and thus maintained the decree passed by the trial Court dismissing the plaintiff's suit.
(3.) Along with the appeal, the appellant filed the application under Order 6, Rule 17, Civil Procedure Code, i.e. Civil Miscellaneous No. 2432/C/1978 for which notice was given and it was ordered to be heard along with the main case.;