Ram Kishan vs Mahesh Kumar and Others

Paramjeet Singh, J.—Instant revision has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 27.08.2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra in execution petition No. 153 of 2011 dated 22.1.2011/24.11.2011 in Civil Suit No. 01 of 1984, under Order 21 Rules 11 and 32 read with Section 151 of the CPC (in short "the CPC"). Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts relevant for disposal of the present petition are that respondents no. 1 to 3 and their predecessor-in-interest filed civil suit u/s 92 of the CPC for removal of the petitioner-defendant Ram Kishan, Khidmatgujar from the Thakur Dawara in village Niwarsi, Tehsil Ladwa, District Kurukshetra as well as from the agricultural land measuring 137 kanals 15 marlas attached with Thakurdwara where Lord Shiva Temple exists and worshippers and devotees used to offer money and jewellery. The said suit has been decreed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide judgment and decree dated 05.08.1987. The appeal preferred by the petitioner-judgment debtor has also been dismissed by this Court on 13.10.2009 and even the SLP filed by the petitioner has also met with the same fate on 11.01.2010. It would be appropriate to mention here that during the pendency of Regular First Appeal before this Court, stay was granted vide order dated 11.11.1988, subject to deposit of Rs. 35,000/- per year in advance as mesne profit and the amount deposited was ordered to be put into fixed deposits for three years which was to be released to the person who would succeed in Regular First Appeal. The petitioner-judgment debtor remained unsuccessful in the litigation upto the Hon''ble Supreme Court of India and thereafter the respondents filed execution petition praying for execution of the judgment and decree dated 05.08.1987. During the pendency of execution, objections were raised by the petitioner to the effect that the execution petition was not maintainable and liable to be dismissed, as the decree holders till that date had failed to formulate any scheme and without formation of a valid scheme/registered trust/registered society, the petitioner-objector could be removed from the post of Khidmatgujar from the Thakurdwara. It is further averred that Shri Thakurdwara is a registered society and the petitioner is Khidmatgujar of Thakurdwara managed by that society. The petitioner is regularly paying the lease money to Thakurdwara Society and he is also doing the services at Thakurdwara being Khidmatgujar. He has been cultivating the land measuring 137 kanals 15 marlas of Thakurdwara Society since the year 1964. It is further averred that the respondents intentionally and malafidely did not file the suit against the Society and has been wrongfully filed u/s 92 of the CPC.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

After hearing the respective parties, this Court finds that the objections raised by the petitioner are not maintainable, as he has already lost up to the Hon''ble Supreme Court of India. He cannot claim that Thakurdwara is managed by the Thakurdwara Society. The material on record clearly shows that Thakurdwara Society is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1960, vide registration No. 2574 dated 06.11.1987. This has been created to defeat the decree dated 05.08.1987 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra. Had there been any Society since 1964 or later then that Society would have contested the suit along with Ram Kishan, the alleged Khidmatgujar. It appears that the petitioner is the creator of Shri Thakurdwara registered society as President and Secretaries of the Society are his very close relatives i.e. brother-in-law and son-in-law of Ram Kishan and the alleged Society has been created after passing of the judgment and decree dated 05.08.1987, whereas, the registration of the Society is dated 06.11.1987. It appears that the said Society has been created with a purpose to defeat the rights of the decree holder. As per the terms of the decree, a scheme was sought from the decree holders and judgment debtor by the then Additional District Judge and the scheme proposed by the respondents-decree holders was accepted, whereas, the scheme proposed by the petitioner-judgment debtor was rejected. This is also the case of the petitioner-judgment debtor that the basic purpose of creation of the Society is to manage the affairs of Thakurdwara, the intention of both the parties is to manage the Thakurdwara in view of the religious faith of the people of nearby area and that in view of this, there was no reason to decline the scheme furnished by the petitioner. It is further the case of the petitioner that the said scheme of the respondents-decree holders was approved by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 03.06.1988. The scheme prepared by the respondents is quite transparent and does not give any advantage to any individual member of the Society created under the scheme.

Since the constitution of the proposed Society in the name of Thakurdwara Panchayat Khetra, Niwarsi may take time as the process of constitution of Society involves election, so, time is required for preparation of rules and holding of election in a fair manner and for this purpose some impartial agency is required to be appointed as receiver. In view of this, the learned Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra has appointed Naib Tehsildar, Ladwa as receiver and directed him to prepare the list of voters as per clause 4 (a) and to hold the election.

Vide impugned order dated 27.08.2012, the Court has passed the very fair order which reads as under:

The receiver shall complete all the proceedings of formation of society within four months. In the meantime, the receiver shall manage and maintain Thakurdwara in accordance with law. The receiver shall take into its possession the whole record of the funds of Shri Thakurdwara as it has appeared that Rs. 35,007/- per annum is being deposited by Ram Kishan JD and the accounts are being audited by the Chartered Accountant. So, the receiver so appointed shall take control of all the finances and management of land attached to Thakurdwara in accordance with law. H shall be permitted to make reasonable expenses for holding election of society and other day to day activities. The receiver shall account for each penny so spent by him on the affairs of Thakurdwara Society. The receiver shall be entitled to a consolidated remuneration of Rs. 15,000/- per month which shall be paid from the funds of Thakurdwara. The progress report shall be submitted by the receiver fortnightly preferably by 16th and Ist day of every month. In case 16th or Ist day of the month happens to be holiday, then on the next working day. A copy of this order be sent to the Naib Tehsildar, Ladwa for compliance.

In view of above, I do not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order dated 27.08.2012.

Dismissed. There is no order to costs.