Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3.The averments in the plaint in O.S.No.16 of 1987 (A.S.No.446 of 1995) are as follows:-

The plaint schedule properties are trust properties belonging to Sadhus Trust known as "Sri Sempiradhaya Sathus". These trusts are managed by Guru Sizhya Parambara (From Guru to Sishya and so on). According to such practice of succession Ramakrishna dass father of the plaintiff became the Trustee and come to the Management of the trust and its properties. He was incharge of a Trust at Dhanushkodi and also 2 trusts at Rameswaram inclusive of the suit trust. The present suit is in connection with what is known as "Thulasi Bava Mutt"
otherwise known as "Khakchowk" and also Sri Penchamuga Hanuman situate at Seetha Theertham in Rameswaram. In the year 1959 Ramakrishna Dass was in full charge of the trust at Dhanushkodi and put in possession as trustee his younger son Kali Krishna Dass @ Kalyana Dass in charge of the said trust. At the same time he put the plaintiff in charge of the Hanuman Temple and Mutt in Parvatham Village on the principal of Guru Sishya Parambara. The properties are all trust properties and it is to be managed by the Trustee who is known as Mahanth or Madathipathi. The Trustee have no power of alienation and the property should be with the Sishya of the Guru and after him it goes to his Sishya if he is having one or it will go to the other Sishya of the same Guru. Kali Krishna Dass @ Kalyana Dass was not married. He died on 11.3.1986 at Rameswaram hospital. The plaintiff is the other Sishya of the same line of Guru and as such the plaintiff became entitled to the management of the trust and its properties. He is also entitled to the management of the trust as per Hindu Law. The plaintiff is at present in actual possession of the Thulasi Bava Mutt.Seetha Theertham and Sri Panchamuga Hanuman Temple etc., are all belong to the trust. The plaintiff was prevented from taking possession of the schedule mentioned properties belonging to the trust. The plaintiff's brother who was the previous trustee viz., Kali Krishna Dass @ Kalyana Dass had created three documents dated 8th October, 1985, 19th February,1986 and 25th February 1985 respectively. The first document (Sale deed dated 8.10.1985) is in respect of plaint schedule Item No.1 in favour of the first defendant, the second document (sale deed dated 19.2.1986) is in respect of plaint schedule Item No.2 in favour of D2 & D3 and the third document (sale deed dated 25.2.1985) is in respect of plaint schedule Item No.3 in favour of the third defendant. Previous trustee died on 11.3.1986 and the present plaintiff has succeeded his Office of trusteeship. Hence, the suit for recovery of possession of the suit properties and for mesne profits both future and past.
The plaint schedule properties belong to the plaint trust. On the basis of Guru Sishya relationship the trust is being administered. So as per the said arrangement the plaintiff's father Ramakrishnadass was administering the plaint trust at Rameswaram and another trust at Dhanushkodi. The plaint trust is also known as Thulasi Bava Mutt or "Khachowk". The trustee Ramakrishnadass, father of the plaintiff, stayed at Rameswaram and also administered the trust by name Anuman Koil Trust, in the place called Thaniparuvatham. Bachya Anuman temple and Seetha Theertham also belong to Thulasi Bava mutt. During 1959 Ramakrishnadass came into possession of the said trust and administered the same, and his son Kali Krishna Dass @ Kalyana Dass was entrusted with the trusteeship of Thulasi Bava Trust. Subsequently Ramakrishnadass had given in adoption his son Kali Krishna Dass to one Jeyaram Dass. After the said adoption Kali Krishna Dass was known as Kalyana Dass. The other son of Ramakrishna Dass is Mr.T.R.Gopal Dass, the plaintiff herein. T.R.Gopal Dass was the trustee of Anuman Temple at Thaniparuvatham, Rameswaram. Both the trust were administered by the trustees known as "Maganth". After the death of this trustee his Sishya will become the trustee. After the death of Kali Krishna Dass on 11.3.1986, his brother T.R.Gopal Dass, the plaintiff herein, became the trustee as the disciple of his Guru since Kali Krishna Dass. Kali Krishna Dass died without any hires. To get the possession of some of the properties of the trust, Gopal Dass has filed O.S.No.16 of 1987 before the District Court, Ramanathapuram. The said suit is pending. Kalyana Dass had no right or title in respect of the suit properties to execute the sale deeds. D1, D2, D3, D4, D5 & D6 have purchased the trust properties from Kalyana Dass under sale deeds dated 13.6.1979 (in favour of D1), dated 17.12.1980 (in favour of D2) and dated 7.8.1982 in favour of D3 & D4, dated 2.8.1984 in favour of D5 & D6. The plaintiff requested the defendants to handover possession of the plaint schedule properties / trust properties. The defendants even though agreed to handover possession at first, subsequently at the instance of the defendant in O.S.No.16 of 1987 refused to handover possession of the plaint schedule properties. Hence, the suit for recovery of possession and for mesne profits both past and future. 4(a)The first defendant remained exparte. The second defendant in his written statement would contend that the plaintiff is not the trustee of the plaint trust. There is no trust as alleged in the plaint in existence. The plaintiff has no legal status to file the suit in the capacity of a trustee of the plaint trust. There is not dedication made to the plaint trust in respect of the plaint schedule properties by any one. The plaintiff is not in administration of the plaint schedule properties as a Sishya of his Guru. The plaintiff was never in possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule properties and he never administered Thulasi Bava Mutt trust at Rameswaram or Anuman Koil Trust at Dhanushkodi. Thulasi Bava Mutt was known as "Khakchowk" Trust. Kali Krishna Dass was given in adoption to Jeyaramdass by his father Ramakrishnadass. Jeyaram Dass is not the brother of Ramakrishnadass. Gopal Dass is not the other son of Ramakrishnadass. After the death of Kalyana Dass, T.R.Gopal Dass, the plaintiff, never became the trustee of the plaint trust and never administered the plaint schedule properties in the capacity of a trustee of the plaint trust. This defendant is not aware of the pendancy of O.S.No.16 of 1987. This defendant never agreed to handover the possession of the plaint schedule properties to the plaintiff at any point of time. The averment that at the instance of the defendants in O.S.No.16 of 1987 this defendant had subsequently refused to handover possession of the suit properties is denied as false. Kalyana Dass has become entitled to the suit properties as per the decree and judgment in O.S.No.73 of 1980. He was given patta No.180 in Rameswaram Village in respect of the plaint schedule properties. As per the sale deed dated 22.11.1983, this defendant had purchased three cents of land in the plaint schedule survey number property, which has been sub-divided as S.No.769/1C/1B. After the purchase, this defendant had constructed a tiled house in it. The defendant is in possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule properties from the year 1980 onwards. The suit is barred for limitation. Hence, the suit is liable to be dismissed.
4(b)The third defendant had reiterated most of the defence raised in the written statement of the second defendant. Further, he would contend that there was no trust as alleged in the plaint and the plaintiff is not the trustee of the plaint trust and that there was no Guru Sishya relationship maintained for electing the trustee of the trust as alleged in the plaint. The plaint trust was not known as Khakchowk trust & Thulasi Bava Mutt. The adoption of Kali Krishna Dass by Jeyaram Dass is admitted. T.R.Gopal Dass is not the other son of Ramakrishnadas. He was not given in adoption to Parameswaradass. The plaintiff was never in administration of the plaint trust. Kalyana Dass died on 11.3.1986. The plaintiff was never in administration of Thulasi Bava Mutt trust or Panchamuga Anuman Temple at Rameswaram. This defendant along with D4 had purchased 'D' schedule property on 7.8.1982 from Kalyana Dass for sale consideration of Rs.35,000/- and had constructed a house. These defendants have also purchased plaint schedule item No.2 & 3. From 1982 onwards this defendant is in possession of the property purchased under the said sale deed date 7.8.1982. This defendant never agreed to handover possession to the plaintiff at any point of time. This defendant is a bonefide transferee of valuable consideration. The suit is bad for mis-joinder of parties and also for mis-