Prayagraj: In the Krishna Janmabhoomi legal dispute in Mathura, the Allahabad High Court has dismissed an application filed by Hindu side plaintiffs in suit No. 7 seeking the removal of Kaushal Kishore Thakur alias Kaushal Singh Tomar as the “next friend” of the deity, Shri Krishna Lala Virajman.
Dismissing the application, Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra noted that the grounds taken in the application were not sufficient for the removal of “next friend”, which, he said, was a “drastic” action that can only be taken when it is proved that the “next friend” is acting against the interest of the deity.
The seventh suit is one of the 18 civil suits presently pending before the high court pertaining to the Krishna Janmabhoomi title dispute.
Also ReadShahi Idgah dispute: Application in HC against its order on representative suit
In this suit, declaratory relief was sought to the effect that the plaintiffs be declared as owner of the disputed property on which the Shahi Idgah Masjid stands.
The plaint also prayed for the relief of permanent injunction in respect of the disputed property.
The second and fifth plaintiffs moved an application under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) seeking deletion of the name of Kaushal Kishore Thakur as the “next friend” of the deity (first plaintiff), substituting him with Ajay Pratap Singh.
It was submitted that Thakur’s conduct went against the interest of Krishna Lalla, that he had filed a separate civil suit in Mathura along with advocate Reena N Singh, and that he was attempting to “destroy” the nature and structure of the present suit.
It was also alleged that Thakur had been removed from the membership of the Yogeshwar Shri Krishna Janamsthan Seva Sangh Trust and was misusing his position.
On the other hand, advocate Reena Singh, appearing for the first plaintiff, opposed the application and submitted that deletion of the name of the “next friend” of deity is impermissible under Order 32, Rule 1 of CPC, as the deity is always a minor and can only be represented through a “next friend”.
She argued that Thakur had represented the deity in his individual capacity as a resident of 266 Madhav Vilas, Vrindavan, and not in the capacity of a member of any trust.
The court examined the provisions of Order 32 relating to suits by minors and the removal of “next friends”.
Justice Mishra observed that Order 32, Rule 9 of CPC permits the removal of a “next friend” only when the interest of the “next friend” is averse to that of the minor, or where he fails to do his duty, or other sufficient cause is shown.
The court in its order dated September 26 concluded that the applicants failed to show that the interest of the “next friend” was adverse to that of the deity, or that he had failed in his duty.
The Krishna Janmabhoomi case is a legal dispute concerning the Shahi Idgah mosque and the adjoining Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi temple.
Hindu plaintiffs claim the mosque was built on the ruins of a temple that stood on Lord Krishna’s birthplace and are seeking its removal.
Get the latest updates in Hyderabad City News, Technology, Entertainment, Sports, Politics and Top Stories on WhatsApp & Telegram by subscribing to our channels. You can also download our app for Android and iOS.
