Jharkhand High Court
Bharatvarshiya Digamber Jain Tirth … vs Jain Shwetamber Society on 18 August, 2025
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
L.P.A. No.449 of 2024
-----
Bharatvarshiya Digamber Jain Tirth Kshetriya Committee
through its President at Madhuban, P.O. & P.S. Pirtand,
District Giridih, through its authorised person Mahendar
Kumar Jain aged about 62 years son of Kailash Chandra
Jain, Resident of 102/Paras Apartment, Kutchery Road,
P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Kotwali, District Ranchi, State Jharkhand.
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. Jain Shwetamber Society, a registered religious and
charitable Trust at Madhuban, P.O. & P.S. Pirtand,
District Giridih, through its Manager.
2. State of Jharkhand.
3. The Collector, Giridih, P.O. P.S. & District Giridih.
4. Bharatvarshiya Digamber Jain Terapanthi Kothi,
Madhuban, P.O. & P.S. Pirtand, District Giridih through
its President. ... ... Respondents
-------
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI
-------
For the Appellant : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
: Mr. Praveen Kr. Sinha, Advocate
For the Resp. No.1 : Mr. Jitendra Kr. Pasari, Advocate
: Mr. Animesh Kr. Pasari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rahul Kamlesh, AC to SC-IV
------
Order No. 07/Dated 18 August, 2025
th
Per Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
Prayer
1. The instant appeal is under Clause 10 of the Letters
Patent directed against the order dated 07.02.2024 passed
in W.P.(C) No.5523 of 2014 passed by the learned Single
Judge of this Court, whereby and whereunder the learned
writ court has quashed and set aside the order dated
17.07.2014 passed by Respondent No.2 in Misc. Case
No.25 of 2000 and remanded the matter to the Respondent
1
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
No.2 to reopen the proceeding of Misc. Case No.25 of 2000
and to pass an order under Section 10 of the Indian
Treasure Trove Act, 1878 expeditiously in accordance with
law and accordingly disposed of the writ petition.
Factual Matrix
2. The brief facts of the case as per the pleading made
in the writ petition, which are required to be enumerated,
read hereunder as :-
On 01.06.2000, in course of excavation for new
construction in the land adjacent to the main temple in the
Temple Campus (Jain Shwetamber Kothi) of the petitioner,
19 consecrated worshipable Idols of Jain Tirthankar were
unearthed.
3. An information about the recovery of the said idols
was given to the Police Outpost at Madhuban as well as to
the Office of the Collector by the petitioner on the same
day, i.e. 01.06.2000. Incharge of the Police Outpost
prepared an Inventory of the Idols.
4. On 02.06.2000, on the orders of the Respondent
Collector, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Giridih along with
Deputy Superintendent of Police, Giridih visited the
campus of the petitioner and on the orders of the Collector
sealed the unearthed 19 idols in a room of the Dharmshala
and asked President of the petitioner Trust to execute a
security (Jimmanama) in terms of section 4 of the Indian
2
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
Treasure Trove Act, 1878 (hereinafter to be referred to as
the Act, 1878). As per the direction of the Officers, the
President and Secretary of the Society executed security.
5. The Respondent Collector vide letter No. 1550 dated
07.06.2000, requested Director Archeology, Bihar, Patna to
inspect the recovered idols as well as the excavation site
and submit its report so as to take decision with respect to
ownership of the said idols.
6. On 02.07.2000, Director, Archeology along with
other Officers of the Department in presence of
representatives of Shwetambers and Digambers, including
Bharatvarshiya Digamber Jain carried on Tirthkhsetriya
Committee inspected the idol and archeological clearance
work at site.
7. The Director, Archeology vide memo no. 268 dated
11.07.2000 submitted its report to the Respondent,
Collector, inter alia stating therein that all the 19 recovered
idols were buried in the soil by digging a pit about 200-250
years back perhaps due to fear of the then “Mughal
invaders”.
8. The respondent No.3 Bharatvarshiya Digamber Jain
Tirthkhetra Committee on 15.07.2000 filed a petition under
section 7 read with Section 4 of the Act, 1878 before the
Respondent No.2, the Collector, for inter alia declaring idols
as Digamber Jain Idol and delivery of same to Digambers.
3
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
The said petition was numbered as Misc. Case No.
25/2000.
9. The Director, Archeology, prepared another report,
dated 18.07.2000, inter-alia stating therein that similar
Idols have been worshiped in the temples of both
Shwetambers and Digambers sects. It was further
suggested that the idols could be handed over to Digamber
sect.
10. The respondent No.2, without determining value of
the Idols obviously and rightly because Idols are
worshipable, ex-commercium, issued a general notice on
27.07.2000 under Section 5 of the Act, 1878 in Misc. Case
no. 25/2000, a copy of which was also served to the
petitioner.
11. Thereafter, the petitioner on 11.01.2001, filed its
objection, inter alia stating therein that proceedings under
the Act of 1878 are not maintainable and prayed for
rejection of the petition filed by the respondent No.3 on the
ground the (a) idols are worshipable hence valueless and as
such not treasure under Sec. 3 of the Act, (b) mandatory
requirements of the Act has not been followed, (c) idols
having similar inscription and character are installed and
worshiped in temple since centuries, (d) Digambers have no
locus in present proceeding.
4
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
12. The respondent No.3 filed another petition before
the respondent No.2 on 15.03.2001 with a prayer to keep
the recovered idols in safe custody pending adjudication of
the matter whereupon the respondent No.2 vide order dated
19.11.2002 directed the Circle Officer, Pirtand to take the
said idols in custody in presence of both the parties by
keeping them in a properly sealed wooden box and
thereafter to deposit the same in the District Treasury.
13. The Petitioner challenged the said order before the
Commissioner, North Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh
under Sec. 76 of the Practice & Procedure Manual, 1958 by
filing Misc. Revision (R) 126/2002 on 16.12.2002 and the
learned Commissioner after hearing the parties vide order
dated 25.01.2003 set aside the entire proceedings of Misc.
Case No. 25 of 2000 pending before the respondent No.2
holding that the same got vitiated due to non-compliance of
mandatory provision of publishing a general notification in
terms with Section 5 of the Act, 1878 before passing the
order for interim protection of the said idols.
14. The said order of the Commissioner, North
Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh was challenged by the
respondent no. 3 by filing a writ petition being W.P.(C)
No.916 of 2003 on 17.02.2003.
15. Learned Single Judge stayed the order dated
25.01.2003 passed by the Commissioner, North
5
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh during pendency of the
said writ petition. In the meantime, the petitioner and the
Secretary of one of the subsects of Digamber Society i.e. the
respondent no. 4, entered into an agreement on 16.02.2003
and in terms of said agreement, 9 idols were installed in the
temple of Shwetamber Society i.e. the petitioner and 9 idols
were installed in the temple of the respondent no. 4 in
presence of Jain Acharya Shri Sushil Surishwarji, whereas
one idol which was in broken condition was lying in the
temple premises of the petitioner. Thereafter, the
Shwetamber Society filed I.A No. 543 of 2003 for vacating
the stay granted by learned Single Judge, however, the said
interlocutory application was dismissed by learned Single
Judge on 08.04.2003 and subsequently, vide order dated
14.08.2003, the writ petition was referred to learned
Division Bench after noticing the argument of learned
Advocate General, State of Jharkhand that the land had
vested in the State and, therefore, the said treasure
belonged to the State of Jharkhand.
16. The Jain Shwetamber Society through its Manager
also filed a writ petition on 18.09.2003 being W.P.(C) No.
4820 of 2003 for quashing the entire proceeding of Misc.
Case No. 25 of 2000 including the order dated 19.08.2003
passed by the respondent no. 2 and the said writ petition
was also referred to learned Division Bench for being heard
6
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
along with W.P.(C) No. 916 of 2003. Thus, W.P.(C) No. 4820
of 2003 was tagged with W.P.(C) No. 916 of 2003.
17. Finally, learned Division Bench, vide order dated
14.05.2004 passed in “Bharat Varshiya Digambar Jain
Tirth Kshetriya Committee” allowed W.P.(C) No. 916 of 2003
and quashed the order dated 25.01.2003 passed by the
Commissioner, North Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh
by restoring the order dated 19.11.2001 passed by the
respondent no. 2.
18. The Respondent Collector, in terms of direction of
this Hon’ble Court, issued general notice dated 20.07.2004
under the Act of 1878, which was published in the district
gazette as well as in the newspaper and in compliance of
said notice six persons including petitioner filed their
respective claim but the respondent Digamber Committee
had not filed any claim, hence its claim, if any stands
forfeited under Sec. 6 of the Act of 1878.
19. The respondent no. 2 vide order dated 21.09.2004,
decided to proceed for determining the dispute in terms of
Section 7 of the Act of 1878.
20. The Collector, Giridih by order dated 29.12.2009
after hearing the parties, inter-alia declared u/s 9 of the
Treasure Trove Act, declare the treasure- discovered,
nineteen idols, the subject matter of present dispute to be
ownerless.
7
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
21. The order of the Collector declaring Idols Ownerless
was not challenged by filing an appeal as provided under
Sec.9 of the Act, to the best of Petitioner’s knowledge, hence
the order attained finality.
22. It is worth to state here that after order dated
29.12.2009 the case was adjourned on several dates before
the impugned order dated 17.07.2014 was passed and on
all most all the dates Petitioner was represented through
his Advocate, but hearing could not take place in the
matter for one reason or other and unfortunately Advocate
of the petitioner failed to appear on 17.07.2014 and the
impugned order was passed.
23. During the pendency of the case, the Respondent
Collector vide letter no. 1393 dated 26.10.2010 requested
the Secretary, Department of Art, Culture, Sport and
Youth, Jharkhand, in reference to the judgment of this
Hon’ble Court dated 14.05.2004, inter-alia to investigate
and report on following points:
(i) Whether Idols are covered under the provisions of the
(ii) Whether Idols are covered under the provisions of the
Act of 1958 and Bihar Act of 1976?
(iii) Whether it is necessary under the provisions of said
Acts to deliver Idols for conservation and use to the
Competent Authority?
8
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
24. The Director, Directors of Art, Culture, Sport and
Youth, Jharkhand, Ranchi vide his letter No. 212 dated
11.03.2014 replied the said queries as under:
(i) The Act stands repealed.
(ii) Both Acts are applicable on Idols. Sec. 25 and 26
of the Act 4 of 1958 and Sec. 32, 34, 24 and 25 of
the Bihar Act. 1976 are applicable.
(iii) Under-the said Acts, the Idols are required to be
handed over to the Authorized/Competent Officer of
the State Government for ownership, conservation
and use.
25. The respondent Collector vide order dated
17.07.2014 inter alia disposed of the proceedings of Case
No. 25 of 2000 under the Act of 1878 on the basis of the
said report of the Director, without application of mind by a
non-speaking order.
26. Against the aforesaid order, the petitioner
approached this Court by filing writ petition being W.P.(C)
No. 5523 of 2014.
27. After hearing the parties, learned Single Judge has
disposed of the writ petition by quashing and setting aside
the order dated 17.07.2014 passed in Misc. Case No.25 of
2000 and remanded the matter with a direction to reopen
the proceeding of Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 and to pass an
9
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
order under Section 10 of the Act, 1878 expeditiously in
accordance with law.
28. The aforesaid order has been challenged by filing
the instant Letters Patent Appeal.
29. It is evident from the factual aspect that a dispute
arose in between the two Sects, i.e., Digambar, represented
by the appellant herein and the Shwetamber, the
respondent herein, with respect to the 19 idols found on 1st
June, 2000 at Village Maduban, Pirtand, which had been
kept in Jain Shwetamber Kothi and having possession over
the same.
30. The proceeding has been initiated for having the
custodial right of the said idols by way of institution of a
case being Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 in the court of District
Collector, Giridih.
31. An order was passed on 19.11.2002, wherein the
Collector has passed order, taking into consideration the
factum of the dispute of claim of parties, which is to be
decided after their respective evidence and the same since
will take time, therefore, it is for the benefit of both the
parties that idols would be kept under government custody
till the dispute between the parties is finally decided.
32. The Anchal Adhikari, Pirtand has also been directed
to take in custody all the idols in dispute in presence of
both parties and to keep in wooden box properly sealed and
10
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
signed in presence of representative of both the parties. The
parties, if so like, may put their respective seal on the box.
33. The Anchal Adhikari shall keep the sealed box in
district treasury till the dispute between the parties finally
decided.
34. The said order has been challenged by filing a
revision before the Commissioner, North Chota Nagapur
Division, Ranchi being Miscellaneous Revision (R)-126 of
2002, filed under Section 76 of the Practice and Procedure
Manual.
35. The Revisional Authority had decided the issue by
passing final order on 25.01.2003 by quashing the entire
proceeding of Misc. Case No.25 of 2000.
36. The matter finally traveled to this Court under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India in W.P.(C) No.916 of
2003 and W.P.(S) No.4820 of 2003.
37. The Coordinate Bench of this Court has passed
judgment on 14.5.2004. The deliberation has been made on
the issue on fact and law and has issued the following
directions, as would be evident from paragraph 17 of the
said judgment whereby and whereunder the order passed
by the Commissioner dated 25.01.2003 has been quashed
by allowing the writ petition being W.P.(C) No.916 of 2003.
11
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
38. Further, the order dated 09.11.2001 passed by
Collector in Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 had been restored
with the following directions:-
(i) We direct the concerned authorities to consider
whether the statuettes recovered are not objects of
archaeological, historical or artistic interest under
the concerned Acts referred to by us in the earlier
part of this judgment.
(ii) We direct the Collector to get his order dated
19.11.2001 strictly implemented by the Circle
Officer and Anchal Adhikari.
(iii) We direct the Collector to proceed in accordance
with the Act after fulfilling the requirements of the
Act and to take a decision as contemplated by the
Act.
(iv) We direct the Collector and the other superior
officers of the Circle Officer concerned to look into
his conduct in not obeying the order of the Collector
dated 19.11.2001 and making an appropriate
enquiry into his conduct from all angles.
(v) We direct the Collector to expedite the proceedings
and after hearing all concerned, pass a final order
as contemplated by the Act.
39. The Collector, Giridih, in terms of the said order,
has passed an order on 17.07.2014, whereby the
12
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
proceeding initiated under the Act, 1878 has been closed
on the basis of the report dated 11.03.2014 sent by the
Director, Directorate of Art, Culture, Sports, and Youth
Affairs, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
40. The said order dated 17.07.2014 has been
challenged by the respondent herein, namely, Jain
Shwetambar Society.
41. The learned Single Judge vide judgment dated
07.02.2024 passed in W.P.(C) NO. 5523 of 2014 has
disposed of the writ petition by quashing the order dated
17.07.2014 passed by the Collector, Giridih, Respondent
No.2, in Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 remanding the matter
with a direction to reopen the proceeding of Misc. Case
No.25 of 2000 and to pass an order under Section 10 of the
Act, 1878 expeditiously in accordance with law.
42. The said direction has been passed, based upont he
reason, as would be evident from paragraph 42 of the said
judgment wherein it has been referred that the crux of the
direction passed by the Division Bench of this Court
rendered in W.P.(C) No.916 of 2003 with W.P.(C) No.4820 of
2003 was of the adjudication of the issue/dispute for all
times to come but in course of pendency of the said
dispute, 19 idols have been directed to be kept in the safe
custody of the District Treasury to be acted upon by the
Anchal Adhikari of the concerned Anchal.
13
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
43. The learned Single Judge, therefore, has come to
the conclusive finding that when the dispute pertaining to
the custodial right of the 19 idols has been directed to be
decided by the Adjudicator in terms of Section 10 of the
Act, 1878, but closing the proceeding in the midway, based
upon a report, cannot be said to be the justified decision of
the Collector, both as per the power conferred to the
Collector under Section 10 of the Act, 1878 and the
direction passed by the Division Bench of this Court and,
therefore, the order of remand was passed by reopening the
proceeding of Misc. Case No.25 of 2000.
44. The said order is under challenge.
Submission made on behalf of the appellant
45. The ground has been taken by Mr. Rajesh Kumar,
learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the report
since has been submitted by the concerned authority and
based upon the same, if any order has been passed closing
the proceeding the Collector vide order dated 17.07.2014,
the same cannot be said to be unjust and improper but the
learned Single Judge, without taking into consideration the
aforesaid aspect of the matter has quashed the order dated
17.07.2014 by reopening the proceeding of Misc. Case
No.25 of 2000, which cannot be said to be justified and it is
not justified.
14
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
Submission made on behalf of Respondent No.1
46. Per contra, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Pasari, learned
counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1, has submitted
that the learned Single Judge vide judgment impugned has
not passed the fresh direction, rather, it is the reiteration of
the direction already passed by the Division Bench of this
Court dated 14.05.2004 in W.P.(C) No.916 of 2003 with
W.P.(C) No.4820 of 2003 wherein the order has been
passed to adjudicate the issue pertaining to the custodial
right of 19 idols. Therefore, what is being contended on
behalf of the appellant that the order passed by the learned
Single Judge suffers from an error is not having any
foundation, rather, the learned Single Judge has only
remanded the matter to the authority to come to the
conclusion by adjudicating the custodial right as per the
observation and direction passed by the Division Bench of
this Court wherein the mandate of Section 10 of the
Act,1878 has been taken into consideration.
Submission made on behalf of the State
47. Learned counsel appearing for the State, being a
formal party, has submitted that he has nothing to say so
far as the issue on merit is concerned. However, it has been
submitted that the matter is now pending before the
Collector and he being the quasi-judicial functionary, no
direction can be passed by the State Government to
15
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
expedite the hearing, rather, the direction is already there
in the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court.
Analysis
48. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and
gone through the finding recorded by the learned Single
Judge in the impugned judgment.
49. The ground upon which the present appeal has
been preferred is particularly the direction passed by the
learned Single Judge for reopening the proceeding of Misc.
Case No.25 of 2000 which has been initiated to decide the
custodial right of the 19 idols.
50. The learned Single Judge has passed the order to
that effect so that the conclusion be arrived at after taking
evidence on behalf of the parties regarding the custodial
right of the said idols, as per the direction passed by the
Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.916 of 2003 with
W.P.(C) No.4820 of 2003.
51. There cannot be any dispute and nobody can
dispute it that if a dispute has been raised on behalf of the
parties before the Adjudicator on conferment of power
under the statute, it is the bounden duty of such
Adjudicator, whether it is quasi-judicial functionary or it is
the judicial functionary, to adjudicate the issue by coming
to the logical end.
16
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
52. It is not expected from such Adjudicator to not come
to the logical end and rescind the proceeding only on the
basis of a report or the version of the parties, rather, the
propriety demands that if any report has been produced or
any plea has been taken on behalf of the parties, then there
must be the considered finding to be recorded by the
concerned Adjudicator, meaning thereby, the finding must
be based upon active application of mind and not being
suede by any report or any version of the party concerned,
rather, the evidence or the version or the pleading requires
consideration by active application of mind, to be applied
by the Adjudicator.
53. We have gone through the order dated 19.11.2002
which has been passed by way of ad-interim measure to get
19 idols in custody till the dispute between the parties is
finally decided, meaning thereby, the dispute pertaining to
custody of said idols requires consideration and in that
view of the matter, in the Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 which
has been initiated for the purpose of adjudicating the
custodial right in between the parties by way of ad-interim
measure by passing an order dated 19.11.2002 the custody
of the 19 idols has been taken into consideration with a
direction to the Anchal Adhikari, Pirtand to take in custody
all the idols in dispute in presence of both parties and keep
them in a properly sealed wooden box and thereafter to
17
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
deposit the same in the District Treasury till the dispute is
finally decided. The relevant part of the said order is being
referred hereunder as :-
“Anchal Adhikari, Pirtand is directed to take in custody
all the idols in dispute in presence of both parties and to keep
in wood box properly sealed and signed in presence of
representative of both the parties. Parties may if so like may
put their respective seal over the box. The Anchal Adhikari
shall keep sealed box in Dist. Treasury till the dispute
between the parties is finally decided.”
54. The said order has travelled to appeal and revision.
The revisional authority has quashed the order dated
19.11.2002 and thereby the matter came to this Court and
heard by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.916
of 2003 with W.P.(C) No.4820 of 2003.
55. The Division Bench has passed the order and as
would be evident from paragraph 17 thereof, the following
directions have been passed :-
“17. In the result, we allow WP (C) No.916 of 2003 and quash
the order of the Commissioner dated 25.1.2003 and restore
the order of the Collector dated 19.11.2001. We direct the
concerned authorities to consider whether the statuettes
recovered are not objects of archaeological, historical or
artistic interest under the concerned Acts referred to by us in
the earlier part of this judgment. We direct the Collector to get
his order dated 19.11.2001 strictly implemented by the Circle
Officer and Anchal Adhikari. We direct the Collector to proceed
in accordance with the Act after fulfilling the requirements of
the Act and to take a decision as contemplated by the Act. We
direct the Collector and the other superior officers of the Circle
Officer concerned to look into his conduct in not obeying the
order of the Collector dated 19.11.2001 and making an18
2025:JHHC:24695-DBappropriate enquiry into his conduct from all angles. We direct
the Collector to expedite the proceedings and after hearing all
concerned, pass a final order as contemplated by the Act. We
dismiss Writ Petition (S) No.4820 of 2003.”
56. The Collector, Giridih, based upon a report, has
closed the proceeding vide order dated 17.07.2014.
57. We have gone through the said order and found
therefrom that the Collector has given a finding that at
present all the idols are lying with the District Treasury
and, as such, the proceeding be closed.
58. We are very much surprised that this was not the
mandate of the order of the Division Bench of this Court
and power conferred under Section 10 of the Act, 1878,
rather, the Collector has been conferred with the power
under Section 10 of the Act, 1878 as also under the
mandate to adjudicate the issue regarding the right of the
parties for which the Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 has begun
and as ad-interim measure the Anchal Adhikari, Pirtand
was directed to take in custody all the idols in dispute in
presence of both parties and to keep in wood box properly
sealed and signed in presence of representative of both the
parties and to keep the sealed box in District Treasury till
the dispute between the parties is finally decided.
59. The said order has been restored by the Division
Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 14.05.2004 by
issuing direction upon the concerned authority to consider
19
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
whether the statuettes recovered are not objects of
archaeological, historical or artistic interest under the
concerned Acts.
60. This Court, therefore, is of the view that the
Collector was duty bound to adjudicate the custodial right
of the parties.
61. The order passed by the revisional authority when
has been questioned by the respondent herein, then the
learned Single Judge has considered the approach of the
Deputy Commissioner, Giridih to be not just and proper in
not adjudicating the issue and, therefore, the order dated
17.07.2014 quashing the proceeding in connection with
Misc. Case No.25 of 2000, has been quashed and set aside
by restoring the said proceeding in order to decide the said
issue by passing an order under Section 10 of the Act, 1878
expeditiously, in accordance with law.
62. The learned Single Judge, therefore, has taken into
consideration the issue of adjudication of the custodial
right of the 19 idols, subject matter of the lis, and, as such,
while doing so if the proceeding of the Misc. Case No.25 of
2000 which has been closed vide order dated 17.07.2014, if
has been reopened by order of remand, which according to
our considered view, cannot be said to suffer from an error,
reason being that if any interference will be there in the
judgment passed by the learned Single Judge then the
20
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
question would be that how the custodial right of the party
would be considered and decided.
63. The mandate of Section 10 of the Act, 1878 and the
judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court is to
decide the issue by giving a specific finding on the custodial
right with respect to 19 idols, the lis in question, which has
not been taken into consideration, rather, on the basis of a
report in which the custody of the idols has been shown to
be there in the District Treasury, entire proceeding has
been closed.
64. It has been submitted, at Bar, on behalf of the
parties, that the proceeding before the Collector in
connection with Misc. Case No.25 of 2000 (now
renumbered as Misc. Case No.25 of 2025) is at advance
stage. It has also been informed that both the parties are
contesting therein.
65. In that view of the matter also, we are of the view
that no interference is to be shown in the impugned
judgment.
66. Accordingly, the instant appeal fails and is
dismissed.
67. At this juncture, Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned
counsel appearing for the appellant, has submitted that the
talks of compromise is going on.
21
2025:JHHC:24695-DB
68. Mr. Jitendra Kumar Pasari, learned counsel
appearing for the Respondent No.1, has submitted that he
is having no positive instruction on the issue of
compromise.
69. Be that as it may, if the parties have entered into
any compromise, the parties are at liberty to place it before
the Adjudicator for its consideration.
70. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands disposed of.
71. Pending interlocutory application, if any, also
stands disposed of.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Arun Kumar Rai, J.)
A.F.R.
Birendra/
22
[ad_1]
Source link