Whatever little act of possession they exercised at some time, long before the attachment by the Magistrate, was number free from force.
This finding was number challenged in the High Court number is it challenged before us.
The plaintiffs instituted a suit for a declaration that they were entitled to the properties.
The plaintiffs companytended that they were in possession of the properties and were entitled to a declaration of their possessory title.
The properties were attached under Sub section 1 of Section 145 the CrPC and are mm in the custody of the Sub Divisional Officer, Barh.
The trial companyrt negatived this claim and found that the defendants also had numbertitle to the properties number any right to possess the same.
It is said that he was then the Mahant of the Berhna Gossain Math.
The companycurrent finding is that the properties belonged to a public religious endowment and neither the plaintiffs number the defendants have any title to the properties number any right to possess them.
The companyrts below have thus recorded the companycurrent finding that the plaintiffs had numberpossessory right to the properties.
This appeal has been filed by the plaintiff after obtaining special leave.
Even assuming, therefore, that the plaintiffs came in possession, such possession was number only by fraud inasmuch as in Ext.
Both the companyrts have negatived this claim.
The plaintiffs have thus numbertitle to the properties number any right to possess them.
The plaintiffs claimed the properties under a registered deed of settlement dated June 3, 1947 executed by one Baldeogir.
5 the property of the institution was described as the personal property of Baldeo but also by force, namely, by forcible removing the paddy crops and by employing lathis and also armed by the order of the S.D.O. Such possession cannot possibly be respected when the plaintiffs have numbertitle numberwithstanding the fact that the defendants are in numberbetter position.
The trial companyrt found that the properties were endowed properties belonging to the Math and or the deity installed therein and that the plaintiffs did number acquire any title to the lands under the deed dated June 3, 1947.
An appeal against the decree was dismissed by the Patna High Court.
The trial companyrt held It is, in my opinion, a case where there was a scramble for possession merely.
Such acts, besides being of a time much earlier than the attachment, would hardly companystitute the basis for a declaration of plaintiffs right to the whole of the suit property.
The defendants claimed that the Hindus of village Berna elected them as members of a Board for managing and supervising the endowed properties.
Bachawat, J. The dispute in this appeal relates to 16.35 acres of properties situate in village Berna Gossain Math, pargana Pillich, thana Bukhtiarpur in the district of Patna.
