In Brief
A hereditary manager of an ancient temple sought to establish ownership of 5 acres of land surrounding it and secure an injunction preventing state interference with construction and repairs. The trial court partly granted the suit and the High Court affirmed. The Supreme Court allowed the State's appeal, holding the suit wholly misconceived. It found the plaint fatally deficient in material pleadings—the plaintiff failed to plead genealogical descent, details of any state grants or licenses, the nature of construction, or the basis of his claimed Mahantship. Courts cannot grant reliefs beyond the plaint's pleadings or award ownership based on 'adverse possession' when it was neither pleaded nor proved. Both lower courts erred in awarding ownership without proper evidence or statutory consideration of heritage laws.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.