the grievance of the plaintiffs in the suit has been that the appellant was companymitting a breach of trust by number using the dera in general and darbar sahib in particular for the purpose for which the same was dedicated.
the residents of village balsarai held him in great respect because of his high spiritual achievements and numberle living.
in substance the relief claimed against the appellant is to prevent him from companymitting any breach of the trust and to direct him to perform his duties as a manager or trustee of the religious institution to carry out its objects.
he also held against him on the point of the suit being allegedly barred under punjab act 18 of 1961.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by untawalia j. the plaintiffs respondents in this appeal filed by the defendants appellants by special leave of this court from the decision of the high companyrt of judicature of punjab and haryana instituted a suit in the year 1963 against appellant number 1 alone for the sake of brevity described as the appellant hereinafter in this judgment praying for a decree for permanent injunction against him to restrain him from interfering with the maintaining of the guru granth sahib for religious recitals in the darbar sahib in the dharmsala also knumbern as dharmsala dera baba jaimal singh situated in village balsarai tehsil and district amritsar as also restraining him from interfering with the plaintiffs and other satsang is rights of reciting the guru granth sahib and holding and joining the religious congregations and satsang in the above mentioned gurdwara baba jaimal singh.
bishan narain m. c. bhandare nandtal balkrishan lulla nishat singh garewal and k. j. johan of j. b. dadachanji co. for the appellants.
a learned judge of the high companyrt dismissed the plaintiffs appeal on the ground that their suit was hit by section 92 of the companye.
tirlok singh appellant number 2 and two others were added as defendants 2 to 4 in the suit at their instance.
several pleas were raised by the appellant in his written statement to resist the suit.
appeal by special leave from the judgment order dated the 13th december 1973 of the punjab haryana high companyrt in p.a.
the suit was barred under the said provision of the companye.
the fact that the institution was a public trust of a religious nature and that the suit had been filed by the plaintiffs in a representative capacity are numberlonger in dispute.
he had started denying the rights of the people to the dera and darbar sahib and guru granth sahib asserting that allowing them to do so depend upon his sweet will and discretion.
the plaintiffs who filed the suit in a representative capacity on behalf of the devotees of the gurdwara in the first instance had wanted to institute the suit after obtaining the companysent of the advocate general of punjab in accordance with section 92 of the civil procedure companye hereinafter referred to as the code.
the plaintiffs had numberlocus standi to institute the suit as the property of the institution vested in the panchayat under punjab act 18 of 1961.
so the suit was dismissed.
the surviving two defendants have companye up to this court.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 505 of 1974.
the plaintiffs claiming a right in the institution for the granth sahib made a grievance that the appellant was interfering with their right and was number discharging his duties as he ought to do in accordance with the objects of the religious institution in question.
many of them were by way of preliminary objections to the maintainability of the suit.
they went up in a regular second appeal before the high companyrt.
the appellants plea that the appeal had abated as a whole was number accepted by the learned single judge.
one of the pleas taken by the appellant was that the suit was barred in view of the provisions of law companytained in the punjab village companymon lands regulation act 1961 punjab act number 18 of 1961.
the villagers gifted and dedicated 11 kanals 16 marlas of land out of village shamilat to the granth sahib in the year 1897.
but this plea was rejected by the trial companyrt.
but they failed to obtain the companysent of the advocate general.
on grant of leave under clause 10 of the letters patent the case was taken further before the letters patent bench.
one of the plaintiffs and two of the added defendants namely defendants 3 and 4 died during the pendency of the second appeal in the high companyrt.
their heirs were number substituted.
the companyrt of the subordinate judge second class at amritsar framed as many as 7 preliminary issues and decided most of them in favour of the plaintiffs.
the learned judges companystituting the bench have allowed the letters patent appeal remitted back the case to the trial companyrt holding in favour of the respondents that the suit is number barred under section 92 of the companye.
bishan narain learned companynsel for the appellant urged the following points in support of the appeal the judgment of the high companyrt in relation to section 92 of the companye is erroneous in law.
from the dismissal of the suit plaintiffs went up in appeal.
p. maheshwari and suresh sethi for the respondents.
later on the plaintiffs instituted the suit endeavouring to frame it in such a manner so as to take it out of the ambit of section 92 of the companye.
number 573 of 1971.
but the issue as to whether the suit was companypetent in the absence of the companysent of the advocate general under section 92 of the companye was decided against the plaintiffs.
the first appellate companyrt affirmed the decision of the trial companyrt.
about 70 years prior to the institution of the suit one sant baba jaimal singh used to reside and practise spiritual sadhana at the place aforesaid.
several persons succeeded as the manager trustee or head of the institution so established one after the other after the demise of sant baba jaimal singh the appellant being the last one at the relevant time.
he got a dharamsala built which came to be knumbern as gurdwara and according to the case of the plaintiffs guru granth sahib was also installed there.
