Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. So far as the said deeds of appointment dated July 7, 1976 are concerned, it has been alleged by the plaintiffs that each of the said deeds is a forged and fabricated document. Neither of the said two alleged deeds was signed or executed by the said Kunja Behari Das Bidyabhusan and his signatures appearing on the said deeds are not his signatures. Further, it is alleged that the said two deeds have been brought into existence falsely and fraudulently by the defendant or some of them with the wrongful and fraudulent motive and intention to usurp the alleged positions of shebaits and the powers of management, administration, control and custody of the debutter properties including the temples, Maths and residential houses. It is the contention of the plaintiffs that the said deeds of appointment are invalid, ineffective and not binding on the plaintiffs or any of the properties, temples, Maths, lands and buildings belonging to the said Sree Chaitanya Math or its branches. It has been alleged that on November 19, 1978, the defendants Nos. 1 to 6 with 200 persons invaded the said Sree Chaitanya Math at Mayapur with deadly weapons for the purpose of forcibly ousting the plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 11 and the defendants Nos. 7 to 10 who were in control, possession and management of the said Sree Chaitanya Math and all properties, assets and affairs thereof. The plaintiffs claim that the plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 11 and the defendants No. 7 to 11 who are the member of the lawfully constituted Governing Body of the plaintiff No. 1 Mayapur Sree Chaitanya Math, are solely and exclusively entitled to remain in possession, control, management, administration and custody of the plaintiff No. 1 and of all its temples. Maths and other properties and affairs. Accordingly, the plaintiff prayed as follows:

"(a) Leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent;

(b) Leave under Section 92 of the Civil P. C.

(c) A declaration that the plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 11 and the defendants Nos. 7 to 11 are the only members of the lawfully constituted Governing Body of the plaintiff No. 1 and as such are solely and exclusively entitled to remain in control, possession custody, management and administration of the plaintiff No. 1 all its Temples, Maths, lands buildings and other properties and affairs including the said Sri Chaitanya Research Institute;

(d) A further declaration, if necessary, that the defendants Nos. 1 to 6 have no right or title or interest ever or in respect of the plaintiff No. 1 or its Temples or Maths or lands or buildings or any other assets or affairs of the said Sri Chaitanya Research Institute and have no right to manage, administer, control or possess the same;

(e) A permanent injunction restraining the defendants Nos. 1 to 6 and their servants and agents from; --

(i) Interfering in any way with the rights, powers and functions of the said Governing Body of the plaintiff No. 1 in connection with the management, control, administration, custody and possession of the plaintiff No. 1 and its Temples. Maths, lands, buildings, properties, assets and affairs including the said Sri Chaitanya Research Institute;

(c) A declaration that the plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 11 and the defendants Nos. 7 to 11 are the only members of the lawfully constituted Governing Body of the Plaintiff No. 1 and as such are solely and exclusively entitled to remain in control, possession, custody, management and administration of the plaintiff No. 1, all its Temples, Maths, lands, buildings and other properties and affairs including the said Sri Chaitanya Institute.

(d) A further declaration, if necessary, that the defendants Nos. 1 to 6 have no right or title or interest over or in respect of the plaintiff No. 1 or its Temples or Maths or lands or buildings or any other assets or affairs of the said Sri Chaitanya Research Institute and have no right to manage, administer, control or possess the same.