It was during the management of Pradumna Kumar that the impugned order has been passed by respondent No.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated September 10, 1959 of the Rajasthan High Court in D. B. Civil Writ Petition No.
Respondents 1, 2 and the State of Rajasthan which was joined as respondent No.
2, and their numberinees or agents from recovering or from taking any step for the recovery of any Matalaba Matmi under the impugned order of respondent No.
15,404/14/6.
In regard to the allegation of the appellant that the properties in question had been granted to the Idol, the respondents reply merely, stated that allegation was number admitted as the documents regarding the original grants were number traceable.
The appellant also claimed that an appropriate order or direction or writ should be issued quashing the said impugned order as well as the prior order dated April 20, 1954 on which the latter order was based.
1 against the Shebaits and that the appellants grievance that its properties were number liable to pay the said amount was number well founded.
1 from the petitioners estate.
10 of 1957 in the High Court of Rajasthan companytending that the said amount was number recoverable from the appellant.
4 shows that the villages Dehra and Salampukh Balahadi in Pargana Hindaun Baseshu Prasad were allotted for Punya Bhog of Thakurji Sriji.
1808 Annexure Exbt.
The appellant disputed the validity of this order and filed a Writ Petition No.
1 and the Collector, Sawai Madhopur, respondent No.
3 disputed the appellants claim and made several pleas.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
It appears that respondent No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Gajendragadkar C. The short point of law which arises in this appeal is whether under rule 5 of the Jaipur Matmi Rules, 1945, the appellant, the Idol of Thakurji Shri Govind Deoji Maharaj, is liable to pay the Matmi amount in question.
On the death of Goswami Bhola Nath in 1945, his eldest son Goswami Pradumna Kumar succeeded to the Shebaitship and has been carrying on the management of the properties of the temple and looking after the Seva Pooja of the Idol.
C. Kasliwal, Advocate General for the State of Rajasthan, K. Jain and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondents.
On these allegations, the appellant prayed that an appropriate writ, order or direction should be issued prohibiting respondent No.
15,404/14/6 be recovered from the Shebait of the appellant temple.
The High Court has dismissed this writ petition and the appellant has companye to this companyrt with a certificate granted by the High Court.
Similarly, the companyy of the Patta dated Katik Badi 8 of Smt.
326 of 1962.
The companyy of the Patta dated 21st Ramzan St. 1123 Amnexure Exbt.
According to this order, Matmi has been sanctioned in favour of Goswami Bhola Nath on the death of Krishna Chandra Deo and in favour of Pradumna Kumar Deo on the death of Bhola Nath and the total amount directed in that behalf is Rs.
K. Bhattacharya and S. N. Mukherjee, for the appellant.
The respondents urged that the Matalaba Matmi had been properly levied by respondent No.
The appellants petition specifically averred that the property in question bad been granted to the Idol itself and that the Shebaits have been performing the Seva Pooja of the Idol and managing the properties of the temple as such Shebaits.
1, the Board of Revenue, had passed an order on November 6, 1956, directing that the Matalaba Matmi amounting to Rs.
On the death of the ninth Shebait, Goswami Shri Krishna Chandra succeeded to the Shebaitship in 1888 and companytinued to be in management as such Shebait until 1935.
On his death, his eldest son Goswami Bhola Nath succeeded and Seva Pooja was looked after by him during his lifetime.
10 of 1957.
