IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA WRIT PETITION NO.11119 OF 2016 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
SRI. BARAGERAMMA DEVASTHANA TRUST HOLALKERE ROAD CHITRADURGA – 577 501 DULY REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT 1. SRI. T.M.SIDDALINGAPPA S/O LATE KENCHAPPA AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS RESIDING AT NEHRUNAGAR MASJID CROSS CHITRADURGA – 577 501 2. SECRETARY SRI. B.N.NAGARAJ S/O LATE BOMMAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS RESIDING AT GOKULA NIVASA S.R.CIRCLE, BURUJANAHATTI CHITRADURGA – 577 501 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI M.T.JAGAN MOHAN, ADV.,) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY UNDER SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE – 560 001 2. TAHSILDAR AND EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE CHITRADURGA TALUK CHITRADURGA – 577 501 3. S. THIMMAPPA S/O DODDAPPA PRESIDENT BARAGERAMMA DEVASTHANA AND SAMUDAYA BHAVANA DEVELOPMENT SEVA COMMITTEE RESIDING AT JCR EXTENSION 3RD CROSS, NEAR GANAPATHI TEMPLE CHITRADURGA – 577 501 4. G. CHINNAPPA S/O GADEREPPA SECRETARY BARAGERAMMA DEVASTHANA AND SAMUDAYA BHAVANA DEVELOPMENT SEVA COMMITTEE RESIDING AT BURUJANAHATTI CHITRADURGA – 577 501 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R.B.SATYANARAYANA SINGH, AGA, FOR R1 & 2 R3 & R4 – SERVED, UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OR DIRECTION BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 28.01.2016 PASSED BY THE R2 IN ORDER VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND DIRECT THE R2 TO TAKE OVER THE CUSTODY OF PETITIONERS TEMPLE TRUST AND COMMUNITY HALL FROM R3 AND 4 HAND OVER TO THE CUSTODY OF PETITIONERS.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioners are before this court assailing the order dated 28.01.2016 impugned at Annexure-F to the petition. These petitioners are seeking issue of mandamus to direct the respondent No.2 to take over the custody of the petitioners’ Temple Trust and Community Hall from respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and handover custody to the petitioners. The petitioners claim to be president and secretary of Barageramma Devasthana Trust. In that regard, since there are certain disputes with regard to the management of the Temple Trust and the Community Hall, the parties are litigating before different forum. In the proceedings No.MAGCR.60/2015-16, the second respondent has passed the order dated 28.01.2016 by which it is noticed that the parties are litigating before the civil court and in that view, the interim arrangement for management of the affairs of the Temple Trust and the Community Hall is made through the order dated 21.08.2016. The petitioners claiming to be aggrieved by the said order, are before this court.
2. The learned Government Advocate at the outset would bring to the notice of this court the proceedings dated 28.03.2016 in MAGCR 60/2015-16 wherein the petitioners had indicated that till disposal of the appeal in RA No.5/2016 the petitioners have no objection to administration of the affairs of the temple and community hall through the respondent No.2. It is no doubt true that such undertaking is given by the petitioners. However, the grievance of the petitioners is that through the order impugned dated 23.01.2016, the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 have been given the responsibility of managing the affairs of the Trust. It is in that light, these petitioners are seeking that second respondent take over the management from the respondent Nos.3 and 4.
3. In that background, perusal of the order impugned as also the petition papers would disclose that in respect of the management of the affairs of the Temple Trust and the Community Hall, the petitioners and the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 have been litigating in civil proceedings whereunder, a suit in O.S.No.319/2015 was instituted. In view of the objection raised regarding the maintainability of the suit, the order dated 05.10.2015 was passed therein returning the plaint under Order VII Rule 10 to be presented before the court having jurisdiction. The said order is assailed before the lower appellate court in RA No.5/2016 and the same is pending. It is in that light, having taken note of the said position, the order impugned is passed. Though an observation is made in the said order the suit has been disposed of. As of now, the appeal against the said order has been pending 4. Be that as it may, the order passed in the suit is only to return the plaint to be presented before the court having jurisdiction. If that be the position, in any event, the inter-se rights between the petitioners and the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to be decided in the said civil proceedings is pending conclusion. In such situation, if the petitioners are aggrieved by the interim arrangement made by the respondents and in that light, any other arrangement is to be made for the proper management of the affairs of the Temple Trust and the Community Hall, the appropriate course for the petitioners is to seek for such remedies in the pending civil proceedings and such orders if passed therein would bind the respondents herein.
5. Therefore, at this point, I do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned order, which even otherwise is stated to be withdrawn. However, the petitioners would have the liberty of seeking for such relief in the civil proceedings.
Petition is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Bsv