Karnataka High Court
Shri Mallappa S/O Hanamant Pujari vs Shri Malewwa Devi Of Tamadaddi And on 16 June, 2023
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
WP No. 100098 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 100098 OF 2023 (GM-R/C)
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI MALLAPPA S/O. HANAMANT PUJARI,
AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: POOJA & AGRICULTURE,
R/O. TAMADADDI, TQ: RABAKAVI-BANAHATTI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
2. SMT. SUMAN @ SUMITRA
W/O. HANAMANT PUJARI,
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. TAMADADDI, TQ: RABAKAVI-BANAHATTI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
KM 3. SMT. NANDEVVA W/O. MALLAPPA KOLI,
SOMASHEKAR
High Court of
Karnataka,
AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
Dharwad
R/O. BEASTWAD, TQ: ATHANI,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
4. SMT. LAKKAVVA W/O. SIDRAM KOLI,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. SHANKARATTI, TQ: ATHANI,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI S.B. HEBBALLI AND SRI M.C. HUKKERI, ADVOCATES)
-2-
WP No. 100098 of 2023
AND:
1. SHRI MALEWWA DEVI OF TAMADADDI AND
LAKKAWWA DEVI OF HALANGALI,
REPRESENTED BY HEREDITARY TRUSTEE
[SRI MALLAPPA TIPPANNA PUJARI]
AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: HEREDITARY TRUSTEE,
R/O. HALANGALI, TQ: RABAKAVI-BANAHATTI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE, TRUST BEARING
REGISTRATION NO.A-803/BJP.
(SINCE DEAD)
SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LRS
1A. SMT. JAKKAVVA W/O. MALLAPPA PUJARI,
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. TAMADADDI, TQ: RABHAKAVI-BANAHATTI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
1B. SMT. SUREKHA W/O. AJEET TALAWAR,
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. TAMADADDI, TQ: RABHAKAVI-BANAHATTI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
1C. SMT. ARATI W/O. SIDDAPPA PUJARI,
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. TAMADADDI, TQ: RABHAKAVI-BANAHATTI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
1D. KUMARI. PRATIKSHA D/O. SIDDAPPA PUJARI,
AGE: 08 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O. TAMADADDI, TQ: RABHAKAVI-BANAHATTI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
1E. KUMARI KRUTIKA D/O. SIDDAPPA PUJARI,
AGE: 05 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O. TAMADADDI, TQ: RABHAKAVI-BANAHATTI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
1F. KUMAR. GANGADHAR D/O. SIDDAPPA PUJARI,
AGE: 03 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O. TAMADADDI, TQ: RABHAKAVI-BANAHATTI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
2. SHRI CHANAGIREPPA S/O. BASAPPA PUJARI,
-3-
WP No. 100098 of 2023
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MAHALINGAPUR, TQ: MUDHOL,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
3. SHRI SURESH S/O. MALLAPPA PUJARI,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. TAMADADDI, TQ: RABHAKAVI-BANAHATTI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
4. SHRI NINGAPPA S/O. MALLAPPA PUJARI,
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. TAMADADDI, TQ: RABHAKAVI-BANAHATTI,
DIST: BAGALKOTE.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.C. BHUTI, ADVOCATE FOR R1(A) TO R1(F))
(BY SRI SANGRAM S. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4)
(R1(D) TO R1(F) ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER
NATURAL GUARDIAN R1(C))
*****
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER PASSED BY ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSION JUDGE BAGALKOT SIT AT JAMKHANDI IN CIVIL MISC.
NO. 5003/2022 DATED 30/08/2022 (VIDE ANNEXURE-E) AND TO-
SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND REMAND THE CASE
DIRECTING THE TRIAL COURT TO RECONSIDER THE CASE ON
MERIT BY GIVING FULLEST OPPORTUNITY TO ALL INTERESTED
PERSONS IN RESPECT OF PERFORMING POOJA TO MALEWWA
DEVI OF TAMADADDI AND LAKKAWWA DEVI OF HALANGALI AND
PASSED APPROPRIATE ORDER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
WP No. 100098 of 2023
ORDER
Heard learned counsel Shri S.B.Hebballi, along with Shri M.C.Hukkeri, for petitioners, learned counsel Shri S.C.Bhuti, for respondent Nos.1(a) to 1(f) and learned counsel Shri Sangram S.Kulkarni, for respondent Nos.2 to
4.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioners seeking to quash the orders passed by 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkote, sitting at Jamakhandi in Civil Misc.No.5003/2022, dated 30.08.2022 and to remand the case back to the trial Court to reconsider the case on merits by providing fullest opportunity to all persons concerned in respect of performing pooja to Malewwa Devi of Tamadaddi and Lakkawwa Devi of Halangali.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are the family members of original hereditary trustee of Malewwa Devi temple situated at Tamadaddi village registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act 1950 by the Charity -5- WP No. 100098 of 2023 Commissioner, Belagavi at Belagavi. It is also contended that as per the records initially hereditary trustee shown as Yallappa S/o Konappa Pujari, who is head of the family of the petitioners. It is further contended that since from the date of registration of trust till date, the family members of petitioners are the only persons who are performing the pooja of Malewwa Devi temple without any interruption from any 3rd party. This being the facts of the case it is contended that respondent No.1 filed a false petition under Section 3 and 7 of Charitable and Religious Trust Act, 1920 in Civil Misc. Application No.50003/2022 before the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot, sitting at Jamakhandi seeking certain relief's therein.
4. It is further contended that during the pendency of the said application, petitioner No.1 therein died on 11.03.2022. Pursuant to which, respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed an application under Order 10(6) R/w Section 151 of CPC praying to transpose the respondents as -6- WP No. 100098 of 2023 petitioner Nos.2 to 4 to contest the matter. Thereafter, pursuant to transposing the respondents/petitioners, trial Court passed an order allowing the petition declaring the petitioners therein i.e., petitioner Nos.2 to 4 to be hereditary trustee of the applicant trust of Shree Malewwa Devi temple of Tamadaddi and Shree Lakkawwa Devi temple of Halangali. It is this order of trial Court which is challenged by the petitioners.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that respondent Nos.2 to 4 have played fraud on the Court, misrepresented the facts, suppressed the material facts to the Court and have mis-led the Court by stating that the Yallappa S/o Konappa Pujari died unmarried and issueless and thereby further misrepresented with regard to there being no legal representatives of Mallappa Tippanna Pujari and accordingly, obtained a fraudulent order in their favour. Under these circumstances, petitioners herein seek to set-aside the said order in the interest of the deity and the followers of the said deity. -7- WP No. 100098 of 2023
6. Per contra, learned counsel representing respondent Nos.2 to 4 vehemently contends that petitioners herein do not have any locus to challenge the order passed by District and Sessions Judge, (trial Court) in view of the fact that they are not parties to the said proceedings. The application filed under Section 3 and 7 of the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920 so also they are not the legal heirs or representatives of Mallappa Tippanna Pujari. Learned counsel further contends that the statement of petitioners that they are the legal representatives of Yallappa S/o Konappa Pujari is also disputed and that the hereditary trusteeship of Yallappa was deleted long back in the year 1984 itself which is not questioned by petitioners and having not questioned the same, they cannot know the question in this writ petition with regard to the order passed by the trial Court appointing respondent Nos.2 to 4 as hereditary trustee.
7. He further contends that if at all anybody is aggrieved or entitled to challenge the said order, it would -8- WP No. 100098 of 2023 be the legal representatives the Mallappa Tippanna Pujari, but the same also has been rightly considered by the trial Court for the reason that the Mallappa Tippanna Pujari himself filed the application for appointment of hereditary trustees and during the pendency of the petition he died. Hence, the respondents therein transposed themselves as petitioners and the said order came to be passed in favour of respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein. Therefore, primarily there is no locus-standi to the petitioners to question the impugned order, so also they do not have any right over the hereditary trusteeship of Mallappa Tippanna Pujari i.e., Mallewwa Devi temple of Tamadaddi. Therefore, he seeks to dismiss this petition.
8. Learned counsel Shri S.C.Bhuti, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1(a) to 1(d) who are the legal representatives of one Mallappa Pujari who initially filed the application before the trial Court. Originally application was filed by the Mallappa Tippanna Pujari was misconceived and pursuant to his death during the -9- WP No. 100098 of 2023 pendency of the petition, respondent Nos.2 to 4 have played fraud on the Court and have mis-led Court by making a statement that there are no legal representatives of original applicant, so also seeks to set- aside the order passed by the Trial Court.
9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the impugned order passed by the trial Court it is seen that original petition is filed under Sections 3 and 7 of Charitable and Religious Trust Act, 1920, which was filed for appointment of the hereditary trustees of Shri Mallewwa Devi temple of Tamadaddi and Shri Lakkawwa Devi of Halangali trust.
10. It is also the fact that during the pendency of the petition, Mallappa Tippanna Pujari died and the respondents therein who are respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein got transposed themselves as petitioner and the petition came to be allowed. There are rival claims made by the petitioners herein, respondent No.1 and also by respondent Nos.2 to 4. The fact remains that all of them
- 10 -
WP No. 100098 of 2023are concerned with the trust namely Shri Mallewwa Devi temple of Tamadaddi and Shri Lakkawwa Devi Halangali trust, which pertains to a deity wherein certain pooja are conducted in two temples.
11. It would not be appropriate for this Court to conduct a roving enquiry to do a fact finding of the trust and with regard to the legal representatives being eligible to be the hereditary trusteeship and whether respondent No.1 is entitled or respondent Nos.2 to 4, this procedure would have to be adverted to before the trial Court. Trial Court would have to consider all these aspects keeping in mind whether the petition itself is maintainable, whether the petitioners therein are entitled to make such a claim, whether there is any misrepresentation and fraud played on the Court, whether petitioners herein have any right over the trust and whether respondent No.1 has any right over the trust. In view of several disputed questions of fact which cannot be gone into by this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India, I am of the opinion that the
- 11 -
WP No. 100098 of 2023matter will have to be remitted back to the trial Court for the learned judge to go into the matter in detail keeping open all issues including the question of maintainability and locus which would have to be adverted before the trial Court.
Under these circumstances, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i) The writ petition is disposed of.
ii) The matter is remitted back to the trial Court to consider the matter afresh by providing reasonable opportunity to all the parties.
iii) The trial Court shall also consider with regard to the maintainability of the petition and the locus of the petitioners herein to question the relief sought for by respondent Nos.2 to 4 before the trial Court.
iv) All the questions of fact and law are kept open to be decided before the trial Court.
- 12 -
WP No. 100098 of 2023
v) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits and demerits of the matter including the question of law.
vi) It is also made clear that an order of status-quo shall be maintained by all the parties with regard to the trust and its activities including performance of pooja.
vii) Parties are at liberty to move the trial Court seeking modifications, if any and the trial Court shall consider the same and pass suitable orders in accordance with law. Till such application is decided for modification, status-quo shall be maintained.
Sd/-
JUDGE AM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10