mangli prasad in this written statement denied that the plaintiff in that suit had any right or interest in the said groveland the same having been dedicated by mani ram for the purposes aforesaid.
he had by his first wife six sons and a seventh son mangali prasad a wrestler of repute from his second wife rahas kaur.
6000/ he had borrowed to companyplete the said theatre.
this 8th share included the said groveland on which stood the said akhara as also certain other structures.
in or about 1937 the improvement trust of kanpur acquired the whole of the property which companysisted of the said two grovelands buag akhara and the structures standing thereon and the property lying outside and around them.
in 1862 one bansgopal filed suit number 490 of 1862 against mangli prasad and others for partition and for 1/3rd share in the said groveland.
the two idols and the tasweer were obviously intended to give a religious bias to the akhara the first two to attract hindu wrestlers and the third to attract muslim wrestlers.
25000/ as compensation for the rest of the acquired property.
the deed of lease also described the said groveland as having asthan of mahadeoji and mahabir and akhara and taswir of hazrat ali and as having been dedicated to them.
23 by mangli prasad.
it would thus appear that even before 1830 mani ram had already dedicated the said groveland for the purposes of the said akhara and that was why he referred to it as waqf property.
by this judgment the high companyrt declared that as regards the two grovelands and akhara we declare that the plaintiff is entitled to be the manager of the said property.
besides the income from the said groveland mani ram spent large amounts for promoting wrestling and to that end made a number of disciples.
appeal from the judgment and decree dated august 5 1965 of the allahabad high companyrt in first appeal number 187 of 1957.
that judgment has some bearing on the question as to the nature of the property in this appeal as it clearly stated that the groveland in question was an endowed property and that herefore sbeodei kaur companyld number claim that property by inheritance but was entitled to the possession thereof as the manager since mangli prasad had number appointed any one as such manager.
pending the reference a companypromise was entered into between the improvement trust and ishwar narain under which in companysideration of the latter number pressina the reference the improvement trust agreed to sell to in the portion companyresponding to the said endowed property for rs.
he also described how after mani rams death in 1849 the property was administered first by rahas kaur and after her death under the directions of her said will by him.
to the latter part of the questions the answer of the trial companyrt was that possession of the property in question by mani ram and those who came into possession after him was that of managers or trustees.
the said deed of partition stated with regard to the said 1/8th share and the said groveland that numbere of his seven sons would have any interest or right in them as the one eight 1/8th share and the grove which is a waqf property and which 1 the executant have taken for myself the executant and my second wedded wife shall remain owner thereof till our life time.
94934/ .
sheodai kaur filed a suit for a declaration of her right of possession to the said property.
the property came into possession of ishwar narain the son of the said sheodei kaur in 1906.
from the description in the decree of the property declared by the high companyrt as the endowed property there can remain numberroom for doubt that the endowed property consisted of the two grovelands and the enclosure knumbern as buag akhara.
mani ram managed the said groveland in the aforesaid manner using the income thereof for the said akhara.
from the judgment in first appeal number 279 of 1901 of the high court of allahabad dated december 23 1903 it would appear that janki kaur left a will in favour of one kishan sarup and on the latter claiming the property mangli prasads daughter.
as to the first part of the question the trial companyrt held the next part of the issue is about the endowment being valid it is true that mani ram pande was number companypetent to make a dedication in favour of hazrat ali but he had number done so in this case.
mangli prasad filed a written statement therein explaining how the groveland was purchased by mani ram from out of his own funds and how he had dedicated it and referred to be said partition between mani ram and his sons.
in 1914 he applied to the kanpur municipality for permission to build a theatre in a part of the buag akhara and in september 1915 he executed a mortgage to secure repayment of a loan of rs.
whether he pruchased one such groveland and divided it into two or pruchased tow such grovelands and amalgamated them into one is number quite certain.
and o. p. rana for the appellant.
the property is situate in kanpur and bears at present municipal number 26/72 its original number being 26/30.
though the akhara and the asthan companytinued to be maintained by him it appears that he treated the endowed property as belonging to him.
yogeshwar prasad and m veeraappa for respondent number 1 11 the judgement of the companyrt was delivered by shelat j. this appeal by certificate is directed against the judgment and decree of the high companyrt of allahabad dated august 5 1965 and related to a piece of land together with buildings thereupon including an akhara wrestling ground .
the akhara and asthan shall companytinue as heretofore.
by a deed of partition dated june 23 1830 he divided all his properties into eight shares giving one share to each of his seven sons and retained the 8th share for himself and the said rahas kaur.
p. goyal and p. n. tiwari for respondent number 1 1 .
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1393 of 1967.
94934/ less rs.
ishwar narain thereafter filed a reference under s. 18 of the land acquisition act.
the akhara ground was bounded by a companypound wall with an archgate to enter into.
25000/ .
sometime prior to 1830 one mani ram well knumbern during his life time as a wrestler purchased a groveland with trees standing thereon.
in accordance with this companypromise the said land together with the akhara the asthan the said theatre and certain other structures were companyveyed to ishwar narain who was paid rs.
b. agarwala ravinder bana.
on may 12 1862 rahas kaur made a will in which after reciting the partition deed of 1830 she stated as follows he mani ram dedicated two grooves situate in philkhana bazar which has asthan of mahadeoji and mahabir and akhara and taswir of hazrat ali the akhara and asthan up to this day are companytinuing as theretofore and mangli prasad my son is unparalleled in wrestling.
it appears that after mangli prasads death his widow janki kaur entered into possession of the said property.
the award of the companylector dated february 19 1937 shows that for the entire property compensation was calculated at rs.
ishwar narain died in 1948 having prior thereto made his will dated numberember 11 1947 claiming therein that on the death of his mother.
it appears that being himself a wrestler and fond of that sport mani ram pruchased the said groveland for setting up and main taining an akhara where wrestlers of both hindu and muslim communities companyld companye for wrestling.
it appears that with the object of attracting wrestlers he installed on the archgate an idol of mahabirji a shiv lingam over a small room which stood next to the said gate and a tasweer of hazrat ali.
the said sheodei kaur he had become the absolute owner of the said property and bequeathed the said property to balaji and ram chandra the sons of his sister narayani devi with directions to them to maintain the said akhara and the asthana.
along with this land he was possessed of other properties adjacent to the said groveland.
