Punjab-Haryana High Court
Smadh Baba Daulat Giri And Anr vs Molu (Since Deceased) Through Lrs And ... on 15 March, 2024
Author: Anil Kshetarpal
Bench: Anil Kshetarpal
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:037810
RSA No.1080 of 2021 (O&M) -1- 2024:PHHC:037810
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
RSA No.1080 of 2021 (O&M)
Date of Order:15.03.2024
Smadh Baba Daulat Giri and another
.Appellants
Versus
Molu (Deceased) through LRs and another ..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
Present: Mr. Anshul Sharma, Advocate
for the appellants.
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J
1. The facts of this case depict the very sorry state of affairs. First
of all, this regular second appeal has been filed along with an application for
condoning the delay of 3013 days in filing the appeal. Secondly, the
appellants before this court claim to be a religious institution managed by its
Mahants.
2. On 25.05.1973, Mahant Santosh Giri created a lease for a period
of 30 years, which was to lapse on 14.06.2003. After the death of Mahant
Santosh Giri, a civil suit for the grant of decree of declaration with
possession was filed on 25.05.2003 i.e. just 20 days before the lease was to
lapse.
3. Both the courts below dismissed the suit on the ground that the
period of lease was about to lapse when the suit was filed. It was also held
that the suit was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation as Article
96 of the scheduled attached to the Limitation Act, 1963, provides for
limitation of 12 years from the date of death, resignation or removal of the
transferor or the date of appointment of the plaintiff as manager of the
1 of 2
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:037810
RSA No.1080 of 2021 (O&M) -2- 2024:PHHC:037810
endowment, whichever is later.
4. The learned counsel representing the appellants failed to draw
the attention of the court to any error in the judgments passed by the courts
below.
5. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.
6. Hence, it is not considered appropriate to decide the application
for condonation of delay. However, it is evident that there is some
shortcoming in the management of the property belonging to a religious
institution or there is mismanagement in its affairs.
7. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the Deputy Commissioner,
Kaithal, is requested to inquire into the affairs of the appellant and take
appropriate steps to ensure that the property of the religious institution is
sufficiently safeguarded. If the Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal, comes to a
conclusion that the property of the religious institution (appellant) is being
mismanaged or squandered away, he shall be entitled to take all the steps in
accordance with law to take over its management or make appropriate
alternative arrangement so as to ensure protection of its property.
8. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also
disposed of.
March 15, 2024 (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
nt JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned :YES/NO
Whether reportable :YES/NO
2 of 2
