In Brief
A temple trust challenged revenue entries granting occupancy rights to respondents over 4-gunta agricultural property. The respondents (successors of a former temple archak) claimed deemed tenancy because they cultivated the land and later built a house. The Supreme Court held that unauthorized occupants cannot claim tenancy rights, and that the respondents admitted before the Land Tribunal they had no tenancy claim. As archaks, they were fiduciaries bound to protect temple property, not usurp it. The Court set aside the High Court's order restoring wrongful entries and affirmed the revenue authorities' decision to restore the property to the temple's name.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.