TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 2019
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....decree dated 28.01.1998 passed in Civil Suit No.192-A/94 by Civil Judge, Class-II, Sardarpur by which the first appeal has been allowed. 2. The plaintiff Bherulal filed the suit for declaration and permanent injunction in respect of the land having various survey numbers, in total 10, area 6.574 hectares situated at Village Hanumantya Padampura, Tehsil Sardarpur [hereinafter referred to as "the suit land"]. According to the plaintiff, the suit land is registered in the revenue records in the name of private temple and the plaintiff is in possession from the period of his fore fathers i.e. generation to generation. After abolition of Jagirdari on 04.12.1952 and 15.08.1950, the ancestors of the plaintiff are in possession and become Bh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an employee of PWD as PW-1; Veernarayan Sharma, working as Assistant Grade- II in Tehsil Office of Sardarpur as PW-2; Nandram s/o Dhannaji being local resident as PW-3; Manaji s/o Ranchhod being local resident as PW-4 and plaintiff himself as PW-5. The plaintiff has got exhibited as many as 18 documents as Exs.P/1 to P/18. 6. In support of the written-statement, the defendants neither examine any witness nor filed any document. 7. The learned Civil Court vide judgment and decree dated 28.01.1998 recorded the finding against the plaintiff on Issue No.1 that the temple and the land are not the private property of the plaintiff. The Issue No.2 had been answered in favour of the defendants that they have right to give the land by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... period of his fore fathers. The plaintiff has stated that the agricultural land is recorded in the name of temple being a private property and he is in possession since the period of abolition of Jagirdari and the temple and the suit land are not the Government property. In respect of his claim, the plaintiff filed certified copies of Kishtbandi Khatoni as Exs.P/5, P/6 and P/7. In all these revenue records, the land is recorded in the name of Shri Ram Mandir through Pujari Bhagwandas. Therefore, in revenue register the suit land/property neither recorded in the name of ancestors of the plaintiff or in the name of the Government. The land is recorded in the name of Mandir. The plaintiff has sought the relief in the plaint that a decree of d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....liable to be set-aside. 12. In the case of State of M.P. v/s Pujari Utthan Avam Kalyan Samiti [2017 (3) MPLJ 377], the Division Bench of this Court has held that the name of the Pujari cannot be removed from the revenue records and setaside the notification of the Government by which the direction was issued to record the name of the Collector as Manager. Relevant paras are reproduced below :- "8. Division Bench has held that Pujaris have no right to alienate the properties of temple. They have either to cultivate the land or get it cultivated through servants. The right of inheritance of Pujari is subject to his competence to work as Pujari. This is not automatic. Pujari claiming right of proprietorship is not eligible to work as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mple or by the trust, name of the deity/temple or trust, as the case may be, is required to be mentioned in Column No. 3. If the temple is managed by the Pujari, then keeping in view the law laid down by this Court from time to time, his name is required to be mentioned as Pujari along with the name of deity. 11. The arguments of the learned Additional Advocate General that the State of Madhya Pradesh has received a number of complaints that the Pujari whose name has been recorded in Khasra Entry, on the basis of the aforesaid Entries, they have alienated the property of the temple and to protect the interest of the property of the temple, circular dated 07.06.2008 has been issued. It is also pointed out that as per past experience of the....