ADVOCATE GENERAL OF GOVT.OF H.P. Vs. LEELA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the suit the plaintiff alleges that in Sambat 925 B. K. Raj Kumar Birsingh ji got one Dharamsala constructed near Katcha Tank, Nahan, known as Catcha Johar Dharmasala (serai). This Dharmsala (serai) was dedicated for use as a staying place of the general public and a public trust for public purposes of charitable nature was created by Raj -kumar Bir Singh ji. The details of the property are given in paras 2 and 3 of the plaint. Ft is alleged that the Dharamsala (serai) was used by the general public and travellers without let or hinderance. Rajkumar Birsingh ji died in Sambat 1938 B. K. and during his life time, the Dharamsala (serai) remained under his care and management as he was the founder of the trust and was a sole trustee during his life time. After his death, the property was cared for and loocked after by his heir, and successor Kanwar Ranzor Singh and after the death of Kanwar Ranzor Singh, by his son Shri Jagat Bahadur Singh.

(2.) It is further alleged that Shri Jagat Bahadur Singh out of greed and avarice started mis -appropriating the trust property and claimed the same to be his personal property. On 25th April 1963, he sold a part of Khasra No. 991 (out of the disputed property) to Surjan Singh (defendant No, 2), Surjan Singh sold the same to Birender Kumar, (defendant No. 3) on 29 -3 -1968. Shri Jagat Bahadur Singh thereafter sold a part of the property to defendants Nos. 4 and 5 on 1 -1 -1970 for which a mutation was sanctioned on 4 -11 -1971.

(3.) The plaintiff alleges that defendants Nos. 2 to 5 had full knowledge of the fact that the property transferred to them was a trust property and was not capable of being transferred. The defendants Nos. 2 to 5 are not bona fide purchasers for value or without notice and that infect they are constructive trustees of this public trust property.