Jharkhand High Court
Ananta Kumar Behra vs Ram Lal Mandal on 5 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
S.A No. 506 of 2016
------
1. Ananta Kumar Behra
2. Gandhi Sahu
3. Ajit Kumar Behra
4. Pradeep Kumar Sahu
5. Golok Bihari Sahu
6. Rengda Tiu
7. Jagannath Sahu
8. Debendra Sahu
9. Ugrasen Sahu
10. Prafulla Padihari
11. Upendra Kaibarta
12. Motilal Kaibarta .... .... Appellant(s).
Versus
1. Ram Lal Mandal
2. Purna Chandra Mandal
3. Chuni Lal Keshri
4. Shankru Mahakud
5. Akhoy Mandal
6. Anirudh Mandal
7. Durjodhan Mandal
8. Satya Narayan Mandal
9. Harihar Mandal
10. Mahangi Mandal
11. Chaturbhuj Mandal
12. Kamal Lochan Mandal
13. Sub Divisional Officer, Seraikella .... .... Respondent(s)
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.
------
For the Appellant(S) : Mr. Ram Prasad Sah, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Deepak Kumar Dubey, AC to AAG-II Advocate
6/05.05.2022
Heard the learned counsel for the appellants.
This second appeal is filed against the concurrent finding of the facts. The suit
being Title Suit No. 16 of 2001 filed by this plaintiffs-appellants was dismissed. Title
Appeal No.9 of 2006 was also dismissed resulting in this appeal.
I have heard the counsel for the appellant at length. He submits that the only prayer
in the suit was to declare that name of the Kali Puja Committee as "Jay Maa Kali Puja
Committee", Padampur-Telisahi. He submits that resident of village wanted to add the
name Telisahi as the village of Telisahi donated the land. It is his contention that the
District Authorities are giving permission to perform several functions and fair only in
the name of "Jay Maa Kali Puja Committee" without giving importance to the villagers
of Telisahi, thus the suit was filed. He submits that both the courts should have held that
since the land was donated by the villagers of Telisahi, the Puja Committee should have
been named as "Jay Maa Kali Puja Committee", Padampur-Telisahi.
After hearing the counsel for the appellants and after going through the
impugned judgment, I find that there is a Committee which was constituted for
performing Puja and all other activities. The said Puja Committee is named as "Jay
Maa Kali Puja Committee". The Committee is subsisting. There are other members of
the Committee. Surprisingly, the Committee has not been made a party. The said
Committee is a necessary party. Further no right to perform Puja was curbed. From the
evidence it is clear that Kali Puja is being performed continuously without any
hindrance. Even the plaintiffs objected to call for records of the Puja Committee. These
aforesaid facts have been held concurrently by both the courts.
Further, every suit must have a cause of action. This Court fails to understand
the cause of action of this suit. Whether plaintiffs have ever approached the Committee
for changing the name of the Committee, is not clear. Only if they had approached and
it was refused, it will give rise to a cause of action. This aspect is missing. Only relief
is to get the name of Committee changed/modified.
After going the both the judgments, I find that there is no cause of action to file
the suit. Further all the questions are questions of fact concurrently considered by both
the courts. Thus, this appeal is dismissed.
(ANANDA SEN , J)
anjali/cp2
