Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6 FA 611.1996.odt The main object of the trust is shown as religious one and to continue customs and functions to be held in the said temple, to held the annual fair on every Nagpanchami day to feed the Saints and to maintain the Dharmashala in the temple premises. The movable property sought to be registered is shown as pooja utensils worth Rs.2,000/-(Rs. Two thousand), and immovable property shown is the land bearing S.No.229 ad-measuring 5 Acres 23 Gunthas, wherein a temple of Lord Shiva, Dharmashala, Barav (well) and some samadhis are situated. According to the applicants, the said temple is a Public Trust and property referred to above is trust property. The applicants further contends that, Mahant used to manage the temple and its property. The Mahant was a Bachelor and used to nominate his successor from one of his disciples, who is also necessarily a bachelor. There was no regular mode of succession, but, the nominated Mahant shall get rights of the Management of the temple and the property. One Shri Shivgir Guru Harigir was the last Mahant. He did not nominate his chela (disciple).

Furthermore, there is also no evidence that Samadhi's are built where religious leaders, revered by the public, laid their lives and the provision of collection boxes near the Samadhis would have been only for the deposit of offering for the members of the families on the Gurus or towards the fulfillment of vows taken by them. Learned counsel places his reliance on a Judgment in case of Saraswathi Ammal and others Vs. Rajagopal Ammal, reported in AIR 1953 SC 491, wherein, it is observed that :-

The Learned Assistant Charity Commissioner has further observed in his inspection notes that, there is (i.e. ornamental piece of painted wood as fixed on the spires of temples) on the top of Mahadev Pind which may be in height of approximately 35 feet. Said Kalas is engraved with the statues of gods constructed with Mud and Lime. There are constructed Samadhis to the left side at a height of 4-5 feet. There are also Samadhis outside main construction. In all there are 14 Samadhis of different Mahants of temple. Construction of Samadhis is with an Arch over it and a small roof.

Admittedly, different Mahantas occupied the Gadi of 69 FA 611.1996.odt temple and mode of succession to the Gadi was from Guru to Shishya. Further, last Mahant Shivgir did not appoint his disciple during his life time. Opponent Kedargir claiming to be a real brother of Shivgir started asserting his rights as owner of the temple as well as its properties. Same is eminent from the fact that in the revenue record though entry of the temple, Samadhis etc., are mentioned, names of opponent Kedargir alongwith Shivgir came to be mutated. Furthermore, opponent Kedargir sold some of the land out of land Survey No.229 and income was appropriated by him. In the old revenue record, though name of Mahant is shown as Kabjedar in respect of the property land Survey No.229, the said property is not mentioned alone but the temple, Samadhis and well have been shown in the revenue record. The initial Revenue record indicates that, Mahant is the Kabjedar of the landed property on which the temple exists. However, after some years, the name of opponent Kedargir appeared in the revenue record as a Kabjedar to the extent of 50% without any base. It is needless to observe that, said entries are the manipulated entries. Thus, in the given facts and 70 FA 611.1996.odt circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to give much importance to the said entries in the revenue record.