9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 678X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . {See Bhavan Vaja Ors. v. Solanki Hanuji Khodaji Mansang Anr.[ 1972 (2) TMI 94 - SUPREME COURT] }. It is now also a trite law that in the event the document is vague, the same must be construed having regard to surroundings and/or attending circumstances. The nature of the document also plays an important part for construction thereof. The suit filed by the parties, inter alia, involved the question of interpretation of the said consent decree. Parties adduced evidences, inter alia, in regard to the nature of poojas and offerings made to the priest in their individual capacity. Their rights in regard to offer poojas in the temple are itself not in dispute. In a case of this nature where a consent decree does not refer to the entire disputes between the parties and some vaguness remained, the factual background as also the manner in which existence of rights have been claimed by the parties would be relevant. The consent decree, appears to be meant to be operative for a limited period viz. 1956 and 1961. If any of the party to the suit was entitled to keep with him even such non-perishable goods which were to be offered to the Deity, the question of using the terms ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... divided and settled, inter alia, amongst the plaintiffs and the defendants. 3. There were three branches with which we are concerned; one is the branch of the plaintiff, second is the branch of the defendants and the third is the branch represented by Parayya Allayya Hittalamani. The said Allayya and his wife Neelawwa died without any issue. The plaintiffs and the defendant No.1 inherited their right to worship. 4. Disputes and differences having arisen between the parties in regard to right of inheritance of offering poojas in the said temple, the father of the plaintiff filed a suit which was marked as OS No.143 of 1956. Parties therein purported to settle their disputes. The consent terms were filed which were accepted by the Court. The said terms are : For the present year and the turn of Pooja which will come after 12 years, the defendant No.1 with the plaintiff herein and with his help perform the pooja as usual of Prabhudeva in Neelavva s pooja turn. During the abovesaid pooja s time the offerings of Naivedya to Prabhudeva, fruits corns Oil and Milk and Curd, Sugar, Jaggery etc. in perishable goods, defendant No.1 should give half share of perishable goods to plain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acity should be taken by the father of deft.1 and deft.1 should take same but not offering made in the form of gold, silver and money to deity and they should be shared by deft.1 and plaintiffs together as per the decree at Ex.P.2 If it was the intention of the parties, the father of deft.1 should have taken all the offerings made to deity in non-perishable commodities for himself in 1955- 56 and 1968-69. 7. Both the Trial Judge as also the First Appellate Court furthermore took into consideration the documents marked as Exhibit P-1 as also Exhibit P-3 executed by the father of the defendant No.1 in favour father of the plaintiff wherein it was categorically stated that plaintiff s branch had equal right in worshipping the deity during the turn of Nilawwa and he had right to receive alms equally. In this respect, the learned Court of appeal held : This goes to prove that father of deft.1 has admitted that father of the plaintiffs was the nearest heir of Neelawwa and he has also right in the property of Neelawwa such as land Sy.No.759 and right to worship of Prabhuswami. Ex.P.3 is dated 23.03.1965. Even subsequent to Ex.P.2 father of deft.1 confirmed that father of the plaintiffs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ponderating circumstances while construing the contents of compromise decree arrived at between the predecessors-in-title of the parties to the suit and allowed their judgments to be influenced by inconsequential matters, whether High Court would be justified in re-appreciating the evidence and in coming to its own independent conclusion? (2) Whether both the Courts below erred in misconstruing Ex.P-2, the compromise arrived at between the predecessors-in-title in question for purposes of ascertaining the foundation of the suit itself and if so whether that error is to be interfered with in the exercise of High Court s power under Section 100 of CPC? 11. Both the aforementioned questions were answered by the High Court in the affirmative. It was of the view that as compromise decree was binding between the parties and the dispute between them was governed by the said compromise decree, the plaintiffs suit was not maintainable, stating : It is clear from the conditions of performance of pooja as per the terms of the compromise decree that the right of performing pooja during the turn of Neelawwa and Allayya is conferred upon the father of the first defendant and the pooja duri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... settled that which construing a decree, the court can and in appropriate case ought to take into consideration the pleadings as well as the proceedings leading upto the decree. In order to find out the meaning of the words employed in a decree, the Court has to ascertain the circumstances under which these words came to be used. {See Bhavan Vaja Ors. v. Solanki Hanuji Khodaji Mansang Anr. [AIR 1972 SC 1371]}. 17. It is now also a trite law that in the event the document is vague, the same must be construed having regard to surroundings and/or attending circumstances. 18. The nature of the document also plays an important part for construction thereof. The suit filed by the parties, inter alia, involved the question of interpretation of the said consent decree. Parties adduced evidences, inter alia, in regard to the nature of poojas and offerings made to the priest in their individual capacity. The dispute between the parties related to right of worship upon inheritance thereof from their predecessor. Their rights in regard to offer poojas in the temple are itself not in dispute. In a case of this nature where a consent decree does not refer to the entire disputes between ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
