{"id":150889,"date":"2009-11-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009"},"modified":"2017-02-12T08:02:07","modified_gmt":"2017-02-12T02:32:07","slug":"late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Late Siddalingamma vs Siddalingaiah Setty on 2 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Late Siddalingamma vs Siddalingaiah Setty on 2 November, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: N.Kumar And C.R.Kumaraswamy<\/div>\n
 \n\nIN THE HIGH COURT DE KARNATAKA AT BANGALOREI T '\u00bbI.\n\nDATED THIS THE 2\"' DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2039 I  \n\nPRESENT\n\nTHE HON'8LE MR. JUSTICE? N. :KU:M'A7R.:'A\"  \" A  V\n\n&\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CR :<U\u00a7V1ARAS\\A:--;xI\u00e9I${ "  \n\nREGULAR FIRST APPEA'VLE\u00bbINj_c;E_.1o67T' 20%\n\nREGULAR FIRSTAPPEAL:.NO.~1,_0\u00a7E. 2% 092\nIn RF!-\\1067[2_0O2 A   A' '\nBETWEEN:    \n\n1 LATE SIDDiALIA\u00a5'E:A'b'4'M._A.    \nWIDOW OF 'DO'DD,APPASWA'M'f _ \nNO.3Sv;3'6\/E1--,ID.7Tj;" CR'c:ISS,"--.,  '\nGAYATH RINAG'A.vR,._ 'I \u00ab _ '   - \nSINCEDEAD E3Y_   \nSHANKARA;_ \u00ab-\n\n2 SR1, ~S.HAN}<ARA  -\n S\/O.gLAT'E DOD DARPASWAMY,\n 54_Y.EARS'n .. _____ ..\n. RESIDING AT\u00abNo.3536\/1, 7"' CROSS,\n _ CAYAT'H4RIr\u00a2A:3A'R,,\n" .Es'AN:3A'I.oRE 2::  APPELLANTS\n\n " (E_Y SRI."I\u00ab<. N..;HA.RIDASAN NAMBIAR, ADVOCATE)\n\nIII._;':S_;;N.D"*: I _\n\n\u00e9   SIDDALINGAIAH SETTY S\/O SHETTIAPPA,\n\nSINCE DIED BY L.Rs\n\n  SMT. GDWRAMMA, wzoow OF LATE\n\nSIDDALINGAIAH SETH', MAJOR,\n\nV.\n\n\n\n2\n\n( 2) SRI. KESHAVAPRASAD\nS\/O LATE SIDDALIGAIAH SETTY\nMAJOR,\n\n(3) SRI. RAVIKUMAR\nS\/O LATE SIDDALIGAIAH SETTY\nMAJOR\n\nALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.277, 10?" CROSS,  . \nMILK COLONY, BANGALORE 55.    --\n\nSHANTHANANDASWAMY\n\nS\/O NOT KNOWN,  _   \nVEDANATA SREE RAMARPANAvAR'A..ASHRAMA,_   \nSAMPANGIRAM NAGAR,   \n(BEHIND S.R.NAGAR POLICE STA1'ION)=.._\n\nBANGALORE 27. '   '  ' \n\nTHE PRESIDENT\n\nSIOOARAMANA"YO~GA~_V '  _ -- \nASHRAMA SE,vAi_T;\u00bbROS"T, .  ,_  *\nGAYAT,HRI,N_AG,AR,"--I:;,_  ' A '\nBANGALORE,*T3_  _  _\nC\/O SI'DDALING'A3AH'$.E'ITY,"~.. * --\nSINCE DIED. '    \n\nSRI. M R EH'ARATHVAN IS\/O~~\u00abMAOHAvAN\nMAVJ-QR,  I"\n\n (REA  T"aa:I,d he has no L.RS. v\u00e9de Order dated 25.11.2005)\n\nI  $??.;'I.I MA:D":EA'L')BI- RAO\n\nS\/O'vAs\\IA'NTf:IA',:=SET,\n( R'-\u00ab.5 .. vdea_ci}'\n\n SMT. "REMPAMMA W\/O CHANNAMALLAIAH,\n,, 'M'I3.\u00a3I,_OR,\n\nFNARASINGA RAO S\/O RUKMAJI RAO MAN E,\n\nSINCE DIED BY LR\n\nI " "SURESH BABU C.N. S\/O LATE NARASINGA RAO MANE,\n\nMAJOR, SHOP IN 3536\/1 'C', 7" CROSS,\nGAYATH RINAGAR, BANGALORE 21.\n\n\\a\/,..\n\n\n\n \n\n8 BASAMMA W\/O BHADRAIAH,\nMAJOR,\nSINCE VACATED\n\n9 NAGARAJ S\/O MUNIYAPPA\nMAJOR, 4\n\n10 SHANTHAIAH S\/O SIDDAPPAA\nMAJOR,\n\nRESPONDENTS 4 TO 7, 9 & 10 ARE  \nIN PORTIONS FORMING PART OF 3536\/'I.'_C' _\n7*" CROSS, GAYATHRINAGAR, _.EANGALORET--21..,_\n\n ~ ._   ; 'I~..,"AR\u00bbES.PONDENTS\n(BY SRI. NAGANAND, SENIOR COUNSE1'.'FOR_-\u00bb._  \nSUNDARSWAMY RAM DAS AN DV.A'?x\u00a3A.i\\}'D, F'..D*VOCATVE'S7\nFOR R1(2) & R3;  '         \nR6, R7, R9 & R10 ARE SERVED ;. \n\nNOTICE TO R1(1)i;'R1_t'_'3)}""R3S &'-R.jI.D"I.S__ F\u00e9_E'LD SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER .\n\nDATED 5.8.2005; -NGTIIQE TO R5(A}..IS"DIS9ENSED WITH VIDE\n\nORDER DATEDF'1T7..3A.'2OO6\u00a7\u00a7.;  'I ' \n\nIn RFA Mg,1 Q ggl \/zgpgg'  \n\nBETWEEN; _v %' V A\n\n "1'  __  S.I1DDALING'AI:I-I-I-AI'\nr ' WIDOW OF DQDDAPASWAMY\n\n .NO;353S\/'1,"*c;"8?H CROSS\n GATATH RI.NAc3AR\n\nEANGALORE 2:1, SINCE DIED BY L.R\nS H---AN +<A~RA. .\n\n SR1. SHAN+ALINGA..svH ETTFY\n\n2\"\" '\u20ac~TA--GE,., w,_c\".1.ROAO,\n\n .B'A-Q13; ,GALO'*R,E. \n\nV.\"-H. XIRABAGAR\nMAJOR \n\n ARESIDING AT NO.9'5~A, 24*\" CROSS\n RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE 10.\n\nSRINIVAS THIWARI\n\nMAJOR\n\n\" \"No. 128\/22, I FLOOR, R.T. STREET\n\nBANGALORE 53.\n\n\n\n8 VISWANATH\nMAJOR, NO. 12, 28*\" CROSS\n2\"\" MAIN, 7*\" BLOCK\nJAYANAGAR, BANGALROE 82. \n9 DINESH I-IEGDE\nMAJOR, SECRETARY\nRASTROTHANA PARISHATH __  '\nKESHAVA SHILPA, I<EMREGOwDA'NAGAR .\nBANGALORE.  '\n\n10 RAMA PRIYA S\/O RAJESIII-YEN_GAR,   , \nMAJOR  ~  t_     \nNO 8, I 'A' MAIN ROAD, SHIVANAGAR   \nBANGALORE ID.  V    '\n\n  RESRONDENTS\n\n(BY SR1. NAGANAaN'D,]S.E'N"IO_R:   \nFOR SUNDARSWAM.Y"PA;'MDAS A.NDJANAND,g\nADVOCATES FOR Rstzo R-:28;    *\n\nR1 to R3 -- D.ECEASED,;   - \n\nR4 - SERVED) * ' '\n\nTHESE TW.Q R.FA S._\ufb01IRE"FILED UNDER SECTION 95 READ WITH\nORDER 4I;R'uL#E 3. OF-.C?C AGAINST THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED\n;;',2.'@2 P-ASSED. 1N,O.S.N'O';'7O83\/80 C\/W O.S. NO.2033\/95 ON THE\nFILE'OE..TR--E_"I,sT?*:"'ADDITIONL CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE,\nBANGALO_RE,"'v ."D.ECR,EE'ING THE SUIT IN O.S.NO.7083\/8D AND\n\n"~v"DISMISsI,NG THE_"S.--uTIT IN O.S. NO.2o33\/\u20ac95.\n\n .T\u00a5j'ES.E=-RILPPEALS COMING' ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, N.\n'~--..'Ku'MAR_. ;j1., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING.\n\nI\/,\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
These two appeais arise out of the common <\/p>\n
Decree passed in two suits dismissing O.S. No.’_2′<'Z!._.:33v,\/95<\/p>\n
decreeing O.S. E\\lo.7083\/80. Thereforemt'hes.eatw-:oare '<\/p>\n
taken up for consideration together ah.d:"dAispostedAtof' <\/p>\n
common order.\n<\/p>\n
(2) For the purpose’.__of co’nve:riieE*iec.e, the” parties are
\nreferred to as they are rererireee)rrerrre.s;lereosa\/so, the old<\/p>\n
Suit number being:.O’S,’:-No.2A7Z3[,i9?y9′;:’fjg.__’  it<\/p>\n
(3)   in o.s. ho.2o33\/95 is
\nthe entire subject matter of the suit in
\n(3.5. No.7:C83\/8l\u20acl4″is._:Va’onlyiiportion of the property which is in the
\n o~t:rthe..defeVnvdahts in the said suit.<\/p>\n
  the piaihtiff is that the entire property<\/p>\n
1″Voriginaiiylhefhntj\u00e9zdl to one Chickmariappa s\/o Doddamariappa.<\/p>\n
“*”l.–1’i.i\u00e9i’e_VV’gifted theisaid property in the year 1932 to late Sri Sadu<\/p>\n
“‘*rADodd.a’p\u00abpan$wamy who was a disciple of Sri Sivaputraswami of<\/p>\n
with a condition that it shouid not be alienated to<\/p>\n
h\/..\n<\/p>\n
anybody. It was a religious trust created in favour of Sri
\nSivaputraswami as guru of Sri Doddappaswami who was a<\/p>\n
Sariyasi being unmarried. Whiie Doddappaswami was alive, he<\/p>\n
was running an Ashrama called Sri Siddaramana Yogas__rira’m’a. on<\/p>\n
behalf of Sri Sivaputraswami. Sri Doddappaswamyvjjdied’  <\/p>\n
7.8.3950. Thereafter Sri Sivaputraswaimy <\/p>\n
management of the Ashrama arid for its smoothly;managlemerit~,<\/p>\n
formed a Sangha tailed Sri Sidd’a.ramana”-Yogashrarna’ lsevaii<\/p>\n
Sangha, of which he was  The”sa’lcl Sangha<\/p>\n
was managing the Ashrama effieile\ufb01tiyl sin_e.e’*i.\u00a3\u00a7.inizeption. As Sri<\/p>\n
Sivaputraswami tlhev\ufb02found it inconvenient to
\nmanage it vxftij\ufb01roulgh So, for its smooth
\nadministration alufterahisi iifewftivme, he created a religious trust
\ntalliedySriisiiddaramanlalYogashrama Seva Trust by a registered<\/p>\n
Trust illeed  appointing himself as one of the<\/p>\n
1″trustees–.andv_,oth’e~rAlfour persons by name M. Muniveerappa, R.P.<\/p>\n
“”l.–Ti.’i4i”i.re’rnAath, Si\u00e9iiddaiingappa, G.i(. Ramakrishna as trustees. The<\/p>\n
 the President of Sri Siddaramaria Yogashrama Seva<\/p>\n
 represented by his Power of Attorney Holder<\/p>\n
:li\u00ab-.,\ufb02Siddaiingappa. _ The defendants 1 and 2 were engaged by the<\/p>\n
l\/<\/p>\n
President of the Sangha to look after the property on monthly
\nsalary of Rs.25\/~ and Rs.15\/– respectively and were allowed to
\nstay in a small portion of the Ashrama. Incide.nt_all_:y~.V_15′<\/p>\n
defendant is the mother and the 2″” defendant is  <\/p>\n
were working strictly under the supervision of t’l’le’\u00bb’P.residentV and <\/p>\n
the then Secretary of the Sangha till
\nstarted asserting title hostile to trie’p_l.aint\u00a7iif.’V:
\nagainst the interest of the Ashrama.:’l’:l’1e’yfiled.hayigyligceivvfcomplaint
\non 26.6.1978 against the $ecVr’etAa’ry o’f:Vl’t”rieg’vv\u00a7a’n.gha and also filed<\/p>\n
0.8. No.2158\/1978 on their-‘fihlef of-_\u00abthe’.i..Vl_ Vg:lVliJ’n.siff, Bangalore,<\/p>\n
claiming   they rendered themselves
\nliable to  Ashrama premises as their
\npossession, lthatsiof trespassers. Therefore the
\nt\ufb01epsuiitiwiifory possession against the defendants<\/p>\n
directiiiig”to’i-vacate the suit premises and to put the<\/p>\n
“plaintiff  po.sses’sion of the same.\n<\/p>\n
 (5)-…yAl’vt’er service of summons, the defendants entered<\/p>\n
it’v-4″_~._ap.pea:a’nce. They contended that they are not residing in the<\/p>\n
 ‘  Siddaramana Yogashrama Seva Trust. They are residing in the<\/p>\n
K\/.\n<\/p>\n
property bearing S.No.39, New No.1, Street i\\lo.11S, III Division,
\nYeshavantapura hobli, now called as Gayathrinagar, in their
\ncapacity as owners and there is no Siddaramana Yogashrama<\/p>\n
Seva Trust in the said premises. They admitted <\/p>\n
property originally belonged to Chikkamariappagwwfhog <\/p>\n
same to Sadhu Doddappaswamy as per <\/p>\n
dated 4.8.1932. It is also true that Sadhuy :Doddapp”.aswamywas’irI<\/p>\n
a disciple of Sri Shivaputraswamy’e\u00bb.,VVof Hubli..V_””\u00a3ioweyeVr, they
\ncontended it is false that there. waislaniytlr_e.livgious trustxcreated in
\nfavour of Sri Shivaputraswamy\ufb02digit;  Sri Sadhu<\/p>\n
DoddaDDaswVamy.i’ coritenlded it is false that Sadhu
\nDoddappaswamy  being unmarried. Sadhu
\nDoddaPi3a.swamlr””i5.Vthe” rlu-shaind of the 1″ defendant and the
\nfatiheryofsthe…’?.”””*defenVda’n”tand therefore it is false to allege that<\/p>\n
the’  marry and was a bachelor. They also<\/p>\n
vrdehied the a_l.leg_ation that late Doddappaswamy was running an<\/p>\n
“–\u00abl’.j’iAshi*am undefthe name and style of ‘Siddaramana Yogashrama’<\/p>\n
of Sri Shivaputtaswamy in the schedule property.<\/p>\n
“a.’%”iIhIey_;~\u00a7dmitted that Doddappaswamy died on 7.8.1950. They<\/p>\n
Vllii\ufb02derlied the ailegation that after his death, Sri Shivaputraswamy<\/p>\n
g\/..\n<\/p>\n
10<\/span>
\nof Hubli took over the management of the aforesaid property<\/p>\n
and that for the management of the said property, he formed an
\nAshrama or Sangha calied ‘Sri Siddaramana YogashrarnVaj\u00ab.iSV’eyua
\nSangha’ and that he was its iife
\nShivaputraswamy ofiiubii has got no__ri.gh_t,A  ‘
\nrespect of the above property, as such he
\nany Sangha or Trust. They aiso ‘denied
\nwas being managed by’ anyAy_…i:VSaing’ha ihformedf by Sri
\nShivaputraswamy. Further   it is false that<\/p>\n
the said Shivaputraswagmycreatied_”a,:ireiig-iogiisif trust cailed ‘Sri<\/p>\n
SiddaramanVa”YVogas.fh.,raArfia’  a registered deed of
\nTrust datedo   himself as a trustee
\naiongwithj.otherialfotir’perso-nsI:VThey denied the aiiegation that
\nthey.w\u00a2’re?’en’gag’ed ‘th’e”l3resident of the Sangha to look after<\/p>\n
the’V’abti3\/eh a morithiy salary of 125.25\/— to the 13′<\/p>\n
Ev\ufb02””dvefendarit  to the 2″” defendant. They are not<\/p>\n
 un’d.er the supervision of the President and the then<\/p>\n
 the Sangha till June 1978 as alieged. They<\/p>\n
fizntentl that they never recognised the title of the piaintiff at<\/p>\n
 time, since there was no Ashram beionging to the plaintiff<\/p>\n
t<\/p>\n
i\/’<\/p>\n
ii
\nor Sri Shivaputraswamy of Hubli. There is no question of their<\/p>\n
acting against the interest of any Ashram. They did lodge a<\/p>\n
complaint to the Police against one Sri Siddalingappa;~\u00bb:’f”g:’7fhey<\/p>\n
have also filed a suit o.s. No.2158\/1978 which is–r’jr:e~nuhibe\u00e9egdi<\/p>\n
as O.S.5422\/80 against the said Siddaii’n’g-a.ppa_:’4inciivyi’du’a’l if<\/p>\n
capacity.\n<\/p>\n
(6) The defendants specifi\u00bbcal’l’y..ypleaded’ –.th”at”‘~–the”‘above”V<\/p>\n
property was gifted to Sri Sadhu,r-Dodg_d-appaswami, husband of
\nthe first defendant and ‘%fa’ther\u00a7’1″pf::’2t’i7’V”_\u00bb.:d’e\u00abfendant by fate<\/p>\n
Chikkamriyappa under the ;:’di\u00e9\u00a7q:i%i[:orIgif:oatezdf’ 4.8.1932. The<\/p>\n
said donorhhas’in”the-~::SaE’d”–.gi’ft’deed intended that the said
\nproperty must\u00b0*b_e  residence and to perform the
\nreligious.’ activities.  “‘~\u00ab.Blfterg.the death of Sadhu Doddappaswamy,<\/p>\n
the first _Vdefencia:n”tv __being his wife succeeded to the property<\/p>\n
 valongwith.i’he’r’lcif:.ildg:=.’and continued to perform the said activities<\/p>\n
with theu44″hel’p.gVo.f’fSri Siddalingappa who is none other than her<\/p>\n
.1 ijrother\u00e9ll This is on account of the fact that the 2″”<\/p>\n
 was then oriiy a child when Sadhu Doddappaswami<\/p>\n
.”””v..VAAe’xpi’red and she had no other cioser reiatives than<\/p>\n
V.\n<\/p>\n
13<\/span>
\nreiation to the aforesaid property, since they are not aware of<\/p>\n
the contents of any of the documents that might havexbeen
\nobtained, even if any documents do exist. Even if he
\nsaid document, it will not bind the defendants
\nhas been obtained by the said SiddalVi.n\u00bbg\u00bbappa  V’<\/p>\n
influence, misrepresentations and fraud’;  iis–on..accou’nti:’o:f<\/p>\n
the fact that she had reposedVful’l~…_confi’dence saidr<\/p>\n
person being her own brother and,..,gVl:S0.in._vievir”of..the’\u00a7 fact that
\nfor several years the second””dlefend_a’nt  ou’t.of Bangalore for<\/p>\n
his education and ottie:__pur:p’o’sesV; ffliie.,_sa’id;.\u00a7i’ddalingappa may<\/p>\n
have taken documents against the interest
\nof the defeindants  out the valuable suit
\nproperty. 5 . Si,nce’43u_n”e–1i97A.8,  the religious activities in the suit
\n pierfoirrned by the defendants and the said<\/p>\n
Sidadraiiqngapp:a’–\u00ab.:,haVdV”r~never performed any of the activities in the<\/p>\n
“siaid prQpert’y~  no+ he is in possession of the property.<\/p>\n
“iii.–1’i5i’herefore  submit they are the absolute owners of the<\/p>\n
 described in the schedule to the piaint and the plaintiff<\/p>\n
 no legal right to seek their ejectment from the same.<\/p>\n
 defendants submit that the suit as brought is not<\/p>\n
V,<\/p>\n
14<\/span>
\nmaintainable either in law or on facts and it should be dismissed.<\/p>\n
They denied the existence of the trust called ‘Siddaramana<\/p>\n
Yoganashrama Seva Trust’ in the suit schedule property\u00a7:’f”–\u00ab5i’i”..ey<\/p>\n
aiso denied that Siddalingappa is duly authorised <\/p>\n
prosecute the suit. Therefore they sought ‘for; isal  the<\/p>\n
suit.\n<\/p>\n
(7) In the suit filed by the”d_e’fendan’ts: making-l<\/p>\n
the plaintiff in the suit as a_ partyAy3Td:’defe.ndan’t;’t.h_eY..ihave also
\nadded one Siddalingaiah” ii\ufb02setty  p15′ defendant,
\nShantanadaswamy of * \\{edanl:a”   pp’a’n’ava ra Ash ra ma,<\/p>\n
Sampangiraima’nagara’ffas \u00bbi.V42:’*”1s._:V”defendant and tenants in the
\nportions of theVV”p.ro;2erties’as defendants 4 to 10. In the piaint,
\nthey hevef vreiterated–i.vy_hai’t they have stated in the written<\/p>\n
statenje*n.t. ..A’sth_\u00e9”vdefendants are denying their title to the suit<\/p>\n
 vpropei*ty”-.either.”y:-jbyrlfiling suits in various Courts or by their<\/p>\n
assertionsh it became necessary for them to seek for a<\/p>\n
,1.-w..Vd’er;liaration. N0n the date of the suit, they were seeking for a<\/p>\n
 that the piaintiff No.2 is the absolute owner in<\/p>\n
“””v.._p”ossession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property<\/p>\n
iv\/.,<\/p>\n
15<\/span>
\naiongwith plaintiff No.1 who had a life estate therein exercising<\/p>\n
their rights personaiiy and through the respective tenants in
\nrespect of the suit schedule property and aiso soug:’ht:'”‘–for<\/p>\n
Permanent Injunction.\n<\/p>\n
(8) Defendants 1 and 3 filed a common wrifttpenif\ufb01,state_me’nt\u00e9if<\/p>\n
denying the ciaim of the piaintiffs in the\u00ab.said <\/p>\n
the aiiegations made by them inVth:e~v..piain.t in suit by<\/p>\n
way of defence. The other.defendants did not”‘fiie. any written<\/p>\n
statement.\n<\/p>\n
(9)   trial Court framed the
\nfoiiowing issues in  <\/p>\n
IssL{~_{:_\u00a7_in ofs.:\\ip;7o8:\u00a7g1\u00a78o:\n<\/p>\n
  1vJ”i!iihEi\u00e9thea=.aSri. iiofdidappaswamy was a Sanyasi and
\nf
\n‘2…”‘Nhetiier the suit property was gifted to
\nVfbodvdappaswamy on behaif of a reiigious Trust?\n<\/p>\n
 3._ W.h’e’t’her after the death of Doddappaswamy,
\n V. _\u00bb_ri_1anagement of the suit property was taken over<\/p>\n
i\/<\/p>\n
by Shivaputraswamy of Hubii?\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
9.<\/p>\n
16<\/span><\/p>\n
Whether after the death of Shivaputraswamy, <\/p>\n
suit property was being
\nSiddaramana Yogashrama Seva Trust?\n<\/p>\n
Whether the defendants were_ em’plo’yed.””‘on’–_ ‘4
\nmonthly salaries to look afterltheisugift  j
\nWhether the 15’ defendant is 4the”.widovv:;agnd 2″”‘=,”<\/p>\n
defendant is the son of [“Jod’dappa.sw__amy?’.:
\nWhether the suit has beyerf-p_rop_erly.”vailiggggvvfiand
\nproper court fee hasfheefti  _<\/p>\n
Whether Sri. Siddall-nga’ppa’v h.advAA.’;v.azi;I_’thority to
\nverify and sign_the:”plair’rt?   g 3 ~ <\/p>\n
To what. I\u00a7’1e’lie:f:tf;ieVplalrrttiff is ientiti\u00e9dll?<\/p>\n
10.What ot\u00a7iei:_r_”‘\u00a2~,A_vr decrel\u00e9i’ 4′  \u00b0<\/p>\n
Issues  ‘ l<\/p>\n
1.<\/p>\n
DoesV\u00abisuirvivi–ng’~ prove that deceased<\/p>\n
;1$”_plainti_ff’7is the legally wedded wife of<\/p>\n
5f’DQAd.gdavp.pa Swarny and that he is the son born
\n‘~ . yogurt’ ‘orthat. wedlock?\n<\/p>\n
;”..gVL\u00a7o’e:s’_~v_vh__e’V~l.fu’rther prove by virtue of the gift deed
\n“-._datved.Vli~”.i3.1932 executed by Chikkamu niyappa in<\/p>\n
favour of Doddappaswamy, Doddappaswamy had<\/p>\n
it ‘ll”4..acquired exclusive ownership over the suit<\/p>\n
 “schedule property and on his death he succeeded<\/p>\n
to the suit schedule property?\n<\/p>\n
ma nage<;1…_' 4'  "\n<\/p>\n
E7<\/p>\n
3. Does he further prove that he is in actual
\npossession and enjoyment of the suit schedule
\nproperty as on the date of suit?   he<\/p>\n
4. Whether the suit is barred by limitationr’_\u00bbVaS4:’;~Z”
\ncontended by defendants 1 and 3 ?\n<\/p>\n
Is plaintiff No.2 entitled for th_e,relief sioucg5i:ire\u00a3a’i’v?pl  <\/p>\n
6. What decree of Order?\n<\/p>\n
10) By an order, both the sui.t_s=.were.”ciubbtedvfa’nid’V”corrimon” 3<\/p>\n
evidence was recorded. The plainti.ff’–in’~-.order’to. substantiate
\ntheir claim examined one  as PW–1,<\/p>\n
Keshava Prasad as F.’i(V+.2, ‘i–\u00a7:a:nja’i~V:iK_ri_siin:ai'”as PW-3 and S.C.<\/p>\n
Prabhakar    also produced 58 documents
\nwhich are marked  They also got marked<\/p>\n
three other docu’m.e’n’ts.r”as”‘ E$cZ1 to Ex.Z3. On behalf of the<\/p>\n
l’dVefendan-ts,’5Sid’tiia_lingamrria and Shankara were examined as<\/p>\n
 also produced 38 documents which are<\/p>\n
‘Vrnarked’–as  to D38. The trial Court in the course of the<\/p>\n
“*’i.–Ti.3’u.d:grment found the issues in both the suits are not properly<\/p>\n
 therefore while defivering the Judgment, it has<\/p>\n
 r:ecast:the issues. The issues so recast are as under:<\/p>\n
i\/,..\n<\/p>\n
18<\/span><\/p>\n
1. Whether the property was gifted or donated to
\nDoddappaswarny in his individual capacity or for
\nand on behalf of Sishya Parampare? ‘ ”\n<\/p>\n
2. If it is in his individual capacity, then_..w.ho’f~~’.iyjsn–..ff
\nentitled to succeed to the said property.?__”_\ufb01_v V  .<\/p>\n
3. Whether the Court-fee paid is.__suffic.ient?_1 f V<\/p>\n
4. Whether the suit fiied7b’y.._v.Sm’t;-._\u00a7iddaiVi’n’gai*nnf;a_.”\u00a7
\nand Shankara in OS.NoV.’f’2Q’33\/95  ahia\ufb01rredi by<\/p>\n
(11) On appreciation  and~~d’o’t\u00a7_’pV.r.nentary evidence<\/p>\n
on record, the trialf”f.:o’urt”-.heid”;the was donated to<\/p>\n
Doddappaswamy  of ‘sishya parampara’ and not<\/p>\n
in his individuai.._chapaVcity’ancftherefore on his death, it did not<\/p>\n
;i.eyoivegd1n’vvthe defeindvants as contended by them. It also<\/p>\n
rec_ord;ed._a ..fVii1.ding”vthat Doddappaswamy was a sadhu sanyasi<\/p>\n
 and wastnot’vniarrifehdifand therefore the defendants have failed to<\/p>\n
 proye th4at..the”1$5t defendant is the legally wedded wife of the<\/p>\n
.1 -rsaidi..Ejo’dduappaswamy and the 2″” defendant was born out of the<\/p>\n
V.”-if-._afores’aifd”wedlock and therefore they have no manner of right,<\/p>\n
‘fut’-.._AtitlVemor interest in the schedule property. After the death of<\/p>\n
19<\/span><\/p>\n
Doddappaswamy, a Sangha was constituted by his Geri; Sri<\/p>\n
Shivaputraswarni and the property was managed <\/p>\n
Sangha till 1978. Thereafter he formed a ‘i’r_Li.Vs__t’:’a.s f’_Ex.P\u00ab’5..<\/p>\n
dated 25.11.1978 and therefore the  its”?\n<\/p>\n
Defendants 1 and 2 were appointed andthey were..paid siaia’ry.”g<\/p>\n
In 1978 they asserted titie in thea..gei–,es td’\u00bbr.h4ye:iporta\u00a7on of the
\nproperty in their occupatizj}j…_tdand’Afnst\u00e9%–{ed.\ufb02’c.!.ain’iing” title to the
\nsame by filing a suit. V  of the property
\nand therefore  is  possession
\nfrom the    dismissed the suit for
\ndeciarationZtfofmtitieit5fitieAd;’\u00a7,4by’Tithe defendants, decreed the suit of
\nthe piaintiffvvvfforf portion of the property in the<\/p>\n
occupation. Of the “de’fenCiants.”‘ .1<\/p>\n
 .A   by the said Judgment and Decree of the<\/p>\n
 triai cot”.-t, tVheV”.dtefe.n’dants have preferred this appeai.<\/p>\n
 (13) Sr_i’3~Haridasan Nambiar and Sri D.R. Sundaresh, the<\/p>\n
4:~–‘.V.V’ieatrn’edpcounsei appearing for the appeiiants assaiiing the<\/p>\n
. ‘V:.”hin*i.p:t_ig_ried Judgment and Decree contended under Ex.P1 – the<\/p>\n
 deed dated 4.8.1932 the scheduie property was given to<\/p>\n
1\/..\n<\/p>\n
20<\/span><\/p>\n
Doddappaswamy to be enjoyed by him exclusively.  his<\/p>\n
death, appellants being the wife and son have inheri~ted_jxth_e:’.j’sa’id<\/p>\n
property. They were living with him till his deat:h~.,V <\/p>\n
death, they continued to be in poss;:essio’nfi,o’f,, <\/p>\n
schedule property. T_herefore_:t_he trial’VCourtf–cornrnitl;ed~ <\/p>\n
serious error in holding   deed
\nDoddappaswamy did not become  that the
\ndefendants are not the wifeo\u00a7~.l\u00e9i:e’ilioddappaswamy.
\ni\\lextly it was corl’ten.;ded   held as a trust
\nproperty, the .’.\ufb01o’&V’rnanner of right, title or
\ninterest over  plaintiff – trust was
\ncreated by one  who had no manner of right,
\ntitle or interestia”o~.r_:eAr’itheffproperty and the recital in the trust
\niglieeti.  the “p..rope’rtymbelonging to a society is the property in<\/p>\n
respectaof4V%ti=2_el.~trust is created and the schedule property<\/p>\n
Vwas never the ‘property of any society at all. Therefore seen<\/p>\n
 any anole, the plaintiff is not the owner of the property.<\/p>\n
if”–V.xT’he”xpl’a.in.l\u00a7iff has not sought deciaration inspite of denial of his<\/p>\n
“f%ti’tie_,,prior to the filing of the suit and therefore is not entitled to<\/p>\n
 relief of possession. On the contrary, it is the defendants<\/p>\n
it\/.\n<\/p>\n
21<\/span><\/p>\n
who are the owners of the property, who are entitled to<\/p>\n
declaration sought for and protection of their possession.<\/p>\n
(14) Per contra, Sri S.S. Naganand, learned senio_r’oo*uansel<\/p>\n
appearing for the plaintiff contended though the’::”de\u00e9_::c:;Cdath\u00e9d<\/p>\n
4.8.1932 is described as a gift dee–d;’\u00bb–the the<\/p>\n
document make it very clear that  e$_{_e’cutantAaA’ <\/p>\n
document created a trust Vconferrinhg  l’e.ga’l_ V”‘~–!5i’g’i*rts’ on”<\/p>\n
Doddappawamy and beneficiary in;_.eres_t.o’n_his ‘si’sh-yaw:\/arga’. It
\nwas given for charitable purp’o’s_e- the said gift deed
\ndid not create an exclusive’titlleiiiinajfa\ufb01rourd” u’Doddappaswarny.<\/p>\n
As such the defeVn”dafnts  right to inherit the said
\nproperty. lvloreovverx’thle.’.’e*,r’i::dence on record do not establish
\nthat the..1\u00a7ff”udefenda’nt..ls___t_he wife and 2″” defendant is the son of<\/p>\n
they said-. _VDo_dd\u00abappa-swamy, to whom the schedule property was<\/p>\n
 given~.in,ytru’stVu.”_u.nd;e’r. Ex.P1. It was also contended as the<\/p>\n
 proapertyuisaaaitarust property and the sole trustee havingdied, the<\/p>\n
 of”-Daaodvdappaswamy came down to Bangalore from Hubli,<\/p>\n
V”\u00bb’V.”l_too’i<tpossession of the trust property and for proper<\/p>\n
 naanagement of the property and conduct of the religious<\/p>\n
22<\/span>
\nceremonies which were being carried on by his ‘shishya varga’,<\/p>\n
formed a society and subsequently he created the plaintiff-trust<\/p>\n
to manage and perform the religious functions. Thoughfneither<\/p>\n
the society nor the trust has the legal right to the_.A4*p–ro’p:ei’tjyy
\ncourse of events suggest the trust… .p4rop_\u00e9rty”
\npossession by ‘sishya varga’ and ‘mah’ajai5ias”; as.s’et:”yo:,i’t:V’li”njtihe<\/p>\n
gift deed and they have been’l.u”s-i..ng thr-::_  for-L’<\/p>\n
charitable purposes as n’i_entioned.\ufb02’i’n_”‘an.dVy,.*}vhen the
\ndefendants occupied a portion”–c_oi5–.i}th.’eVii.’:l_property with their<\/p>\n
permission and then_tur_ned:”hoisti:l:eVas.sVe_rting~,th’eir title, the trust<\/p>\n
owes a duHtym”to*’  t_rust”V property and eject the
\ndefendants and ‘recover for them. In that view of the<\/p>\n
matter, ti_=.e.r suit\ufb02ifiled for ejectnwent is maintainable and the trial<\/p>\n
1Co’Lii’i–‘t yw”a–s’ju.stifi’ed in granting a decree for ejectment.<\/p>\n
  thje””aforesaid facts and rival contentions, the<\/p>\n
 points that ai”ri’se:”for our consideration in these two appeais are<\/p>\n
_.  ._qrlq\u00a7r.: ~ (4  ;\n<\/p>\n
23<\/span><\/p>\n
(i) Whether under the registered gift deed
\ndated 4.8.1932 as per Ex.P1 the executant
\ngave the schedule property tokg
\nDoddappaswamy in trust or exclusively’:fC:t”gf__.
\nhimself?\n<\/p>\n
(ii) Whether the 15′ defendantiii\u00e9s’
\nsaid Doddappaswamy  “2J”‘
\nis their son, who hajve–._succte’eded
\nproperty and are ezntiitied to “zzointinule in
\npossession in”‘a.V_por_tido’n”o-f:4the~property <\/p>\n
(iii) Whethertheipiavihnitiff  h\u00ab’a.vs’Ja right to<\/p>\n
V  thx\u00e9”d’efe’ndants'”‘from the scheduie
\n prope’r’tg}:-3:”  ~<\/p>\n
 A<\/p>\n
 \u00bb (V:i5)V  ‘ahswer to the point No.1 revoives around the<\/p>\n
 interpr-e’ta.t’\u00a5oVn’\u00e9tog:..be”piaced on Ex.P1. Ex.F>1 is styled as a gift<\/p>\n
VV*,_deed.  .I.t”‘*V_is””:dated 4.8.1932. It is executed by one<\/p>\n
.1.i,:C’hikE\u00a7amariavpiipa S\/o Doddamariappa in favour of Sri Sadu<\/p>\n
idiv.”g:_Doidda~ppaswamy, who is a disc\u00e9pie of Sri Shivaputraswam\u00e9 of<\/p>\n
  It states Sri Sadhu Doddappaswamy is residing at<\/p>\n
if<\/p>\n
24<\/span>
\nBangalore in the Ashrams belonging to others and teaching<\/p>\n
morals and rendering service to God. The said Chickmariappa is<\/p>\n
visiting the said Sadhu Doddapaswarriy for quite somietim~eg””a_’nd<\/p>\n
he is hearing his discourses. As Sadhu Doddappasuiiarny’:.ihas.””i1o”.4_<\/p>\n
Ashram of his own and no place wherehe can g_ivev4dis.cours_es,’-as ‘ ; <\/p>\n
ordained by sadguru, he transferred
\nis worth about Rs.400\/~ for the:’pugrpose:__ an
\nAshram by way of gift,” It’:i-~fu:rthe’r.._.recites…  Sadhu
\nDoddappaswamy with the  raise funds,<\/p>\n
establish an Ashram_and_ ca -iigio  enjoy_irig  said property for<\/p>\n
ever through _p’inloweveVrVV’Sri Doddappaswamy or his
\ndisciples haveuno  to alienate the property in any<\/p>\n
manner. _ Similalriyitheexecufant also do not have any such right<\/p>\n
of’al-ienatiiiont. “in futurefif Sri Doddappaswamy or his disciples<\/p>\n
areV’una_bleri the charitable functions in the Ashram and<\/p>\n
 comes to.-.a:l’:’stand–still, then public are entitled to make<\/p>\n
~-l\u00abl’.j’jVapp’ropriate arrangement for carrying on the objects of the Trust.<\/p>\n
1’*–V.V\u00e9The”npossession of the schedule property was handed over to Sri<\/p>\n
“5VlD–odd_appaswamy on execution of the said document. In fact it is<\/p>\n
 recited that in a portion of the property gifted, he should be
\nV I\/A<\/p>\n
permitted to bury his father on his death where he wili construct<\/p>\n
a tomb.\n<\/p>\n
(17) The Indian Trust Act, 1882 defines what a <\/p>\n
According to the said definition, a ‘trust’ is an obiigation:’an”n,e\u00a7{edi–.’<\/p>\n
to the ownership of property, and ar_i.sing_4ou_tcoi:fi_d’ei’ic\u00a7”. <\/p>\n
reposed in and accepted by the owner}-or:deciare~d_”a.nd <\/p>\n
by him, for the benefit of anothefr,_:or__of a’notne_r ownerf<\/p>\n
The person who reposes or:__deciare.sVithe”confidence, isiicalied the
\n“author of the trust”; the”pers’o_nf}.yihoteiccepts confidence is
\ncailed the “trustee”;4_th__e person :for.’wh0_seVV-benefit the confidence<\/p>\n
is accepted is calied the subject–matter of the
\ntrust is called AV’trust–p’rope,rtyf:..’or “trust– money”; the “beneficial
\n‘iii’-tereStv’5\u00bbbrvv”‘interest”\u00bb.of___the beneficiary is his right against the<\/p>\n
tr’uste\u00a7\u00ab.,as  the trust–property; and the instrument, if<\/p>\n
 any,’whichVu7t:he’,:=.trust is deciared is caiied the “instrument of<\/p>\n
 trust”.  terms of sectioh–6 of the Act, a trust is created<\/p>\n
Aftheauthor of the trust indicates with reasonable certainty<\/p>\n
f”-4’j~._igyf.-anyfiyords or acts (a) an intention on his part to create<\/p>\n
 a trust, (b) the purpose of the trust, (c) the beneficiary,<\/p>\n
R\/.\n<\/p>\n
26<\/span><\/p>\n
and (d) the trust–property, and transfers the trust–property”to the
\ntrustee. Though the Indian Trust Act, 1882 ..a
\nprivate trust and trustees and has no application
\nthe Apex Court has held the principles]gove’rnira_g
\nare applicable to a public trust; _alsor’—Af=7i;herefC:reV”
\nconcepts such as what is a trust,  a  a trust
\nproperty, who is a beneficiary’-are a publictrust.<\/p>\n
(18) in the backgrou,nd,:’_o–f  of law, when
\nwe look at is   of the trust is a<\/p>\n
Chickmariappan __i-it\u00e9_”c:’reate’d._:a:~.t_rustwitti the purpose of providing<\/p>\n
his property, for .cVh’afi-tab,l’e”‘-purposes, for giving discourses by<\/p>\n
Sadhu Doddap’pa_swarny.,V’f_Sa’d..u\u00e9Doddappaswamy is the trustee.<\/p>\n
The ben.e:ticiVa’r’ies ate’\u00ab–h.i,s___disciples. The said trust is created by a<\/p>\n
re’gViste’re.d  transferring the trust property to the<\/p>\n
 vtrustee,.”–.l”fhei–“.jbe’n’evficiaries are sishyas and public at large.<\/p>\n
 Therefore itis a’  blic trust. The legal title to the property vests<\/p>\n
tfheatrustee and the beneficial interest or ownership lies with<\/p>\n
 the slijslhlyas or the general public. Therefore a careful reading<\/p>\n
.  ‘  oftthle recitals in Ex.P1 makes it clear that the author of the trust<\/p>\n
E;\/.\n<\/p>\n
28<\/span><\/p>\n
case, on the happening of the event, in the latter, when the
\nhappening of the event becomes impossibie. Therefore___it was<\/p>\n
contended when the property is transferred in favour_.’ef:’-St_advhu<\/p>\n
Doddappaswamy, on his death when his ‘sishya <\/p>\n
not continue the purpose for which the,_trust'”is””\u00a7frvea’ted,.V th_e’V <\/p>\n
interest in the property on his death \\}ests_”iiri the iie-irsi1viof<\/p>\n
Doddappaswamy and therefore  became .absVoiu_t’e-…owners;-L’<\/p>\n
The said argument wiii hold good ify_.E$\u00a7A;P.1=i..s topeconystrued as a
\ngift deed simpiicitor where””the_ exect-tant’:i..o’f–..the document is<\/p>\n
gifting a property in fewour of  If the<\/p>\n
executant   absoiute title to Sadhu
\nDoddappaswanjiy’-  is oniy to transfer Iegai
\ninterest conferring,,:V’bVei1eii’cia’I:V interest on the beneficiaries,
\n   Transfer of Property Act have no<\/p>\n
appiicati,_on.rr  ”\n<\/p>\n
(i) *~”ftidor in the 5*” Edn. of his book Tudor on<\/p>\n
 “..f’Charities summed up the principles cieducibie from<\/p>\n
  theteaises on the subject:\n<\/p>\n
If the intention of the donor is merely to
\nbenefit speci\ufb01c individuals, the gift is not<\/p>\n
V .\n<\/p>\n
29<\/span><\/p>\n
charitable, even though the motive of the gift<\/p>\n
may be to relieve their poverty or accomplish
\nsome other purpose with reference to those
\nparticular individuals which would be  .\n<\/p>\n
charitable if not so confined; on the other  ‘<\/p>\n
hand, if the donor’s object is to accomplishthe
\nabstract purpose of relieving pov’er’ty,~.,._ ”<\/p>\n
advancing education or religion or \u00ab
\npurpose charitable within thegirieanirigg of the V
\nStatute of Elizabeth, with0ut1__giving to tarry’
\nparticular individual the Vrightt__to:_clajIn_\u00bb_, the =
\nfunds, the gift is charitable, _V   A ”\n<\/p>\n
(ii) In B.K.Mukherj_ea: The__igHin_du\u00bb law’ ‘Religious
\nand Charitable Trust,_”‘:g’–Tago1je L,a’-.v”\u00ab.Lectures the
\ndistinction between a publiciiand  charitable<\/p>\n
trust has been setgoutiin   terrns:\n<\/p>\n
 are of two kinds, public
\nand private, \u00bb Ina public-.,,endowment, the dedication<\/p>\n
is for.-the uuse..,vor~benefit of the public at large or a<\/p>\n
“‘\u00ab..g,pecitie;;Lgclagss. ‘when property is set apart for<\/p>\n
 th.e”ivorship\u00abv,.of–.a family god, in which the public is<\/p>\n
not interest-ed,,.’the endowment is a private one. It is<\/p>\n
 _ a q1iesti._on~.of fact whether a temple is a private or a<\/p>\n
V”\u00ab.__V”public’oifi:e. The devotees. the supervision exercised<\/p>\n
 founder and his descendants, whether the<\/p>\n
  and pro\ufb01ts are exclusively utilised for the<\/p>\n
T  ‘temple for a long period, as also public visiting the<\/p>\n
 temple for darshan and worship, appearance of the<\/p>\n
E’\/,.\n<\/p>\n
30<\/span><\/p>\n
temple, association of members of public with <\/p>\n
management and earlier statements or admis.si_onf’o:f~tg <\/p>\n
parties are relevant factors to be takein   ”<\/p>\n
consideration as to Whether a temple is   <\/p>\n
or a private one. 2 9 A 9 .\n<\/p>\n
(iii) In order to ascertain Whether  is <\/p>\n
private, the following factors are”re1evvant:’   it <\/p>\n
(1) If the bene\ufb01ciaries’Aig_~\u00e91’r6;s,..\/eascertlained
\nindividuals.  ‘ ‘  V ” Vi <\/p>\n
(2) If the:Vgrant;’haVs’  iiirivlfavour of
\n iand _i1.ot”‘in—‘favour of a<\/p>\n
(Vi”eViff__.V V. ~ -1’<\/p>\n
 he   situated within the
\nxcamptzs  the— residence of the donor.\n<\/p>\n
(293’Therefore.._V_itV’is clear from the recitals in Ex.P1, the
\n   deed never intended to give the scheduie<\/p>\n
propiert\ufb01to”‘i5oddal’;jgj’aswamy for him to enjoy exclusiveiy and<\/p>\n
pversonaily.  he was giving discourses at different Ashrams in<\/p>\n
 and he had no Ashram of his own, the executant gave<\/p>\n
 land to him so that he couid raise funds from his disciples<\/p>\n
“establish an Ashram and then continue the charitabie<\/p>\n
31<\/span>
\npurpose of giving discourses to his disciples and to the public at<\/p>\n
large. It is in that context, it was stated he has no _right to<\/p>\n
alienate the property nor the executant of the docu_me_’nt””has<\/p>\n
retained any right over the property insofar 4_<\/p>\n
concerned. It is also made clear t.hat-thef_pro:pe.–rtf,r.V”is4.’_jto <\/p>\n
enjoyed by the disciples of Sadhu Dodldapipiaslwafmyi;
\nevent of the discipies not beingllthjlere, re’iig__ioiusV\u00bba’ct:i.v’i’ties”; being
\nstopped, then a direction ‘givenl-toVi.’t_h.e”*pyubiictto-taite over the
\nmanagement and make  the religious<\/p>\n
functions to continueiinthegjsaid  Ti*:;erefore the intention<\/p>\n
is very clear. if  in the document is very
\nclear. There ” was.,w_.’nof\u00abintention to give this property to<\/p>\n
Doddappaswamy”for’his personal use exclusively for himself so<\/p>\n
that-.hgisV”i-ega.l’*he”irs woulvdminvherit the property after his death.<\/p>\n
(A2-1) :?he.liV’i5t defendant contends she married Sadu<\/p>\n
if”‘T?”CioVd”daputtas.wamy in the year 1946 and the 2″” defendant was<\/p>\n
 born-..Vi’n\u00bb.t.i*ie year 1948. In fact a Transfer Certificate issued in<\/p>\n
 1967 is produced which is marked as Ex.D1 to show<\/p>\n
I\/t<\/p>\n
32<\/span>
\nthat the father’s name of the 2″” defendant is Sadu<\/p>\n
Doddappaswamy. An entry in the School records in year
\n1967 showing 2″” defendant as the son
\nDoddappaswamy is no proof of the marriage
\ndefendant and Sadhu Doddappaswamy-;Tn-\u00abfact’_,’&eitc’e:Vpt’,_asse’rtinguif
\nthat she married Sadhu Doddappaswamy
\nWednesday, absolutely no particuia:,rs~~._are the”?
\nsaid marriage, their living .–\u00abtogethlerVV:.a:s lhusbalndiandii wife and
\nanybody recognizing them   The trial Court<\/p>\n
has carefulty app,re–cia–t_ed It had the<\/p>\n
advantagegof  ..the_i_demeVanour of the witnesses, in
\nparticular, first’defe.rtdlant””and has come to the conclusion<\/p>\n
that thejimarria\u00e9gefasetl’ up 5;, the 15′ defendant with Sadhu<\/p>\n
‘i)_oddapV’p’asvir’amyA.is notmp\u00e9roved. We have also carefully gone<\/p>\n
thro-tlghtVhe.,’ewntire~.o1raE evidence on record. We do not find any<\/p>\n
1″V’i’llegality*.__Cornmitted by the trial Court in recording the said<\/p>\n
–…_fi,”fi”nd’i’n,g as there is no oral or documentary evidence to prove the<\/p>\n
 n’1a\u00e9rriVag.e..ueset up by the 15′ defendant. The 2″” defendant claims<\/p>\n
befthe son through the 15′ defendant. In addition to the<\/p>\n
iie.,.,U”‘i*’raVnsfer Certificate issued by the school authorities, he has also<\/p>\n
33<\/span><\/p>\n
produced Certificate from the office where he was workging,<\/p>\n
where also he has been referred to as son of Doddappasi_i_vaimy’…y<\/p>\n
When the evidence on record do not establis.h.,’V_”the’:rna’yrr:ag*e._f’~.._<\/p>\n
between the 1″ defendant and late
\nthese documents which have cgomae
\nyears after the death of Doddappasyvaniyg byV”v\u00bb’h’i”chV’:timeooth 1″ V
\nand 2″” defendants have’occupi.ed:_aVl’:’r)Vo’Vrt’i~on ofvvthe schedule
\nproperty, do not establish   is the son of
\nDoddappaswamy,   in holding that the
\n2″” defendant also  that he is the son of 15′
\ndefendant  andlvlthverefore we do not see any
\njustification “said finding of fact recorded by<\/p>\n
the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n
‘(22i)’  \u00bb trust has filed the suit for ejectment.<\/p>\n
 the plaint, they have referred to Ex.P1 and<\/p>\n
after Doddappaswamy died on 7.8.1950, his Guru<\/p>\n
 Shiaoutraswamy of Hubli took over the management of Ashram,<\/p>\n
 smooth management formed a Sanga cailed Sri<\/p>\n
ii\/,.. .\n<\/p>\n
Siddarama Yogashrama Seva Sanga, for which he was the Life<\/p>\n
President. After Shiivaputraswami became oid, herj”fou–.nd–VVAit<\/p>\n
inconvenient to manage it through Sangha. <\/p>\n
administration after his life time, he ..created<\/p>\n
called ‘Siddaramana Yogashrama Sex\/la Trust’ <\/p>\n
trust deed dated 25.11.1978 appo\u00abi_nti.ng fiye.’persons5.as”~tru:stees’~if<\/p>\n
including him. The defendants 1_.-anfd-.2″\u00bbv_vere”engaged by the
\nPresident of the Sangha to  on a monthly
\nsalary of Rs.25\/- and R31  were allowed to<\/p>\n
stay in a smallof.:_t.h;e~.._Ashiiamg,\u00bb They were working<\/p>\n
strictiy under of  President and the then
\nSecretary of th”e_ Sa.n’gh-hafti-i.l:'””‘1978. Thereafter they started<\/p>\n
assertinggzitlge hlostilerto thewlpiaintiff. They started acting<\/p>\n
‘ag.ali’nstV’the ii-riterest of \u00abAshram. They filed a police complaint<\/p>\n
on’VA26..6. the Secretary of the Sang ha and also filed<\/p>\n
 2158\/1.__978n.:’~0An the fiie of the I Munsiff, \ufb01angalore claiming<\/p>\n
themselyes. Therefore they have rendered themseives<\/p>\n
 lia.b\u00able_”to..ui”be evicted from the Ashrama premises as their<\/p>\n
1 oossession has become that of trespassers. Therefore a suit<\/p>\n
 ejectment was filed. In the plaint itself, it is clearly asserted<\/p>\n
37<\/span><\/p>\n
property did not vest with the piaintiff~trust and they are only
\ncarrying on the activities of the Ashrama. But unless the titie in
\nthe property vests with them, they are not the ownersgofy the<\/p>\n
property in question. They cannot maintain<\/p>\n
possession against a person who is in actual occu”p_ati\u00bbon. of the <\/p>\n
property. When the titie is denied eve;nWhefor_e’*’fiIi-ngiisoi<\/p>\n
it was obligatory on the partof the1p!.aintift_”.i_t.o” see’ic’fo’r’–..y<\/p>\n
deciaration of titie. The title do notv\u00e9sts withthes tom; and they V<\/p>\n
are not the owners of the schedui\u00abe”‘pro:p4erty.._andtherefore they
\ncannot maintain a suit for possession?3’Qatiigi’5’\u00a7’:.pe_iiidefendants.<\/p>\n
(23) if the tru.ste:es.di’e.s:””wi~thout making any provision for<\/p>\n
his succession,  the pi-aintiff is in possession of the property<\/p>\n
 the trustfit is open to them to get a scheme<\/p>\n
 Civii Court, get thernseives appointed as<\/p>\n
It:’ustees—._and.-thieyjiicarry on the trust activities and in the course .<\/p>\n
“”i.–Ti.”o’f__V”dischargi_rig the duty as trustee initiate appropriate<\/p>\n
 p’roAceVed.inigs against the defendants who are trespassers on the<\/p>\n
 “property and recover possession. But the present suit filed for<\/p>\n
:ii\u00ab-.:v'”ejectment against the defendants on the ground that they have<\/p>\n
38<\/span>
\na right in the trust property on the face of it is not maintainable.<\/p>\n
In that view of the matter, the trial Court was not justi–fied in<\/p>\n
granting a decree for possession in favour of theV:V’pi’ai:nt.iff<\/p>\n
directing ejectment of the defendants from the  <\/p>\n
schedule property which is the SUbj\u00e9(ft”’mgaiiteifr\u00e9fvi._tfie~’.:’SUf’i’E\u00ab. ‘<\/p>\n
Therefore the decree passed in OV.S.\n<\/p>\n
set aside. Hence we pass the fo|ior.ry:i’t:.g order; ‘   it <\/p>\n
1) RFA No.1066\/2002 is afjfora\/ed;’Ah.”‘–:_ Vvfor\ufb02xejectment<\/p>\n
passed by the trial Court isvhfrerebff’s’et_.asitfe; <\/p>\n
2 ) RFA No.1067\/2\u00a3)02fjs’distnissecit  if  .. <\/span><\/p>\n
3) Parties tvcgbear their  ‘<\/p>\n
Sd\/-.\n<\/p>\n
W;\n<\/p>\n
Iudg\u00e9’<\/p>\n
Sd\/-5
\nI11dg’\u00a7<\/p>\n
” ”  i,’3s9′.’_f <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Late Siddalingamma vs Siddalingaiah Setty on 2 November, 2009 Author: N.Kumar And C.R.Kumaraswamy IN THE HIGH COURT DE KARNATAKA AT BANGALOREI T ‘\u00bbI. DATED THIS THE 2″‘ DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2039 I PRESENT THE HON’8LE MR. JUSTICE? N. :KU:M’A7R.:’A” ” A V & THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CR :<U\u00a7V1ARAS\\A:–;xI\u00e9I${ " REGULAR FIRST […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-150889","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nLate Siddalingamma vs Siddalingaiah Setty on 2 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Late Siddalingamma vs Siddalingaiah Setty on 2 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-11-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-02-12T02:32:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"30 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Late Siddalingamma vs Siddalingaiah Setty on 2 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-12T02:32:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":5488,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Late Siddalingamma vs Siddalingaiah Setty on 2 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-12T02:32:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Late Siddalingamma vs Siddalingaiah Setty on 2 November, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Late Siddalingamma vs Siddalingaiah Setty on 2 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Late Siddalingamma vs Siddalingaiah Setty on 2 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-02-12T02:32:07+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"30 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Late Siddalingamma vs Siddalingaiah Setty on 2 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-12T02:32:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009"},"wordCount":5488,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009","name":"Late Siddalingamma vs Siddalingaiah Setty on 2 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-12T02:32:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/late-siddalingamma-vs-siddalingaiah-setty-on-2-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Late Siddalingamma vs Siddalingaiah Setty on 2 November, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/150889","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=150889"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/150889\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=150889"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=150889"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=150889"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}