Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

It is further submitted that petitioners are the persons interested in protection of the properties of the deity. They have come to know that one Arunava Banerjee claims himself to be the President of the Managing Committee of Arsh Vidya Niketan on whose application under Section 34 of the Indian Trust Act, Misc. Case No. 349 of 2013 was registered before the District Judge at Alipore. They also learnt after searches in various courts at Varanasi that a suit being No. 584 of 2008 was filed by one Ashoke Kumar Chakraborty claiming to be the trustee and shebait of Arsh Vidya Niketan Trust in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Varanasi City. In the said suit the said Arunava Banerjee was party defendant No. 6 and an order of injunction dated 21.9.2010 was passed restraining the defendants Nos. 5 and 6 namely, Amitava Banerjee and Arunava Banerjee from transferring and/or alienating the suit property which order stood extended from time to time and the same was in force till the disposal of the suit on 18.01.2015.

Further on necessary searches in various registration offices, petitioners have come to know that the Opposite Party No.1 herein has executed two sale deeds on 04.02.2015 thereby transferring the property in question in favour of the Opposite Party No. 2.

On behalf of the Opposite Party No. 1 following facts are pleaded by way of rebuttal :-

a) Arsh Vidya Niketan at Varanasi is not a unit of Sadhan Samar Ashram. It is stated that Satya Deva-III Jatiraj Brahmachari was Acharya of the Arsh Vidya Niketan and had been residing within the premises of Arsh Vidya Niketan.
d) The Sadhan Samar Ashram by the said Deed of Declaration of Trust made on 2nd April, 1938 declared Sadhan Samar Ashram as a Trust for Seva and Worship of Almighty and to install the image of Lord Shiva.
e) Arsh Vidya Niketan was founded much earlier as a private non-religious trust than Sadhan Samar Ashram which was declared as a trust in or about 1938.
f) The property belonging to Arsh Vidya Niketan was purchased in or about 1933-1934 by virtue of sale deed and it was purchased for the purpose of residence of Acharya of Arsh Vidya Niketan.

It is submitted that the petitioners are neither contributors nor they are performing any seva puja or other festival in premises of Sadhan Samar Ashram. It is also pointed out that the petitioners are neither the trustee nor any beneficiary of said Arsh Vidya Niketan Trust. Thus, prayed for dismissal of the revisional application in limine.

Mr. Sukumar Bhattacharya learned Advocate for the Opposite Party No. 1 submitted that the petitioners have not explained the delay in moving this revisional application to argue that the application is barred by limitation as the time to file the application expired much before 21st July, 2015, when the application was affirmed on affidavit.