He left behind him four chelas and admittedly one of the chelas, Ram Dass, and married.
On appeal, the appellate Curt recorded the findings thus Hari Dass, the original founder of the trust had number specified any direction in the waqf deed of 1.4.20 with regard to future Shebaitship or Sarbarkarship after the death of the four chelas numberinated by him.
He companystructed a temple, by name Shri Jugal Kishoreji Maharaj Mandir.
The trial Court decreed the suit holding that the plaintiffs are shebaits or sarbarkars to the temple Sri Thakur Jugal Kishorji Maharaj Birajman Mandir Marhi in town Khair and its debutter property as shown in schedule B of the plaint and for possession over the said property and also for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering in the plaintiffs possession over the said property.
Suffice it to state that the appellant had sought a relief of declaration of succession as a Shebait to the mandir, possession thereof and companysequential perpetual injunction against the respondents from interfering with his Shebaitship and possession and enjoyment of the property as a Shebait of the temple.
1940 of 1977.
Thereafter, the disputes arose between the appellants and the respondents as to who would be entitled to succeed to the Shebaitship of the Mandir.
B 19 on 9.2.1955 whereunder he numberinated the plaintiff and his brother as Shebaits of the Mandir.
The appellant and his brother, are the progenies of Ram Dass.
A 45 cancelled the Will and adopted defendant Nos.
Defendant Nos.1 and 2 were minors and as such they companyld neither act as chelas of Bansi Dass number companyld entitled themselves to act as shebatits or sarbarkars in law on any account and the directions given in the adoption deed dated 6.6.66 were illegal and void ab initio Defendants 4 and 4 had got fraudulent and fictitious entires made in Revenue papers in their favour in companylusion with lekhpal as sub tenant over certain area of the temple land though they had numberinterest or title at all and as such Hoti Lal and Kishore Lal, the respective fathers and guardians of the defendants 1 and 2 had numberright to claim the property against the interests of the deity.
It would, thus, be seen that there is numbercontroversy as to whether Rambir Dass became entitled to succeed the temple a shebait as companyld be seen from the evidence in the light of the above legal position, Hari Dass had number laid down any line of succession to his chelas to administer the debutter estate of the temple.
1 and 2 as his chelas, Bansi Dass died on February 3, 1969.
After the abolition of the estate under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition Land Reforms Act, 1950, bhumidari right in the properties were companyferred on the deity Lord Krishna and Radha.
The four chelas were also number given any authority to numberinate future shebaits or sarbarkars after their death and as such that office of Shebaitship of Sarbakarship devolved on the plaintiffs as sons of Ram Dass and Bansi Dass though they were also the disciples of Bansi Dass.
he endowed all his properties to the Mandir.
During his life time by Deed of Adoption dated January 6, 1966, Ex.
The defendants are given one months time to deliver vacant possession of the disputed property to the plaintiffs failing which the plaintiffs would be entitled to get possession through companyrt.
Thus, this appeal by special leave and cross appeal.
His brother Har Govind Dass having become insane, was disqualified to be a Shebait.
Therein, the principal deity is Lord Krishna Radha.
Bansi Dass, the last chela had executed a Will under Which he numberinated Rambir Dass and his brother as Shebait.
4173 OF 1983 O R D E R A. NO.
AND CIVIL APPEAL NO.
Hari Dass left behind him four chelas by name, Narain Dass, Bansi Dass, Monhar Dass and his brother Har Govind Das are sons of Ram DAss.
Bansi Dass, the last serving chela, had executed a will, Ex.
Admittedly, he did number reserve any right to cancel their numberination in the Will.
The admitted position is that one Hari Das owned companysiderable properties situated in the town Khair of Aligarh District which is part of Schedule B attached to the Plaint.
The trial Court granted the decree.
During his life time, he was in charge of the temple as de facto trustee and he did seva service and pooja to the deity.
947 OF 1980 This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment dated 19th March, 1980 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Allahabad in SA No.
