In Brief
The appellant, a temple trust chairman, challenged a High Court judgment that had decreed a suit in favour of two respondents-plaintiffs seeking a declaration of ownership over a house adjacent to a Hindu temple. The Supreme Court held that the respondents failed to discharge their burden of proving ownership through credible documentary or oral evidence. An entry in the endowments book showing only temple boundaries was insufficient to confer title. The Court found the plaintiffs' evidence contradictory and unreliable, and emphasized that tax receipts and municipal permissions imply possession but cannot confer ownership. The Court set aside the High Court's decree and restored the trial court's dismissal of the suit.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.