ARULMIGHU DEVANATHA SWAMY TEMPLE Vs. NEELAMEGA BHATTACHARIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent brought a suit for injunction to restrain the appellant from installing "Hindi" in the temple precincts of Hayagriver Temple attached to Devanathaswamy Temple of Thiruven-dhipuram to receive cash offerings to direct the appellant to pay him the cost the suit and to grant all other just and necessary reliefs.

(2.) In respect of the subject-matter of the suit, there had been earlier litigation too. When the matter reached the High Court in LPA No. 124/59, a scheme was framed by the High Court, which was subsequently modified whereby providing the Archaka shall be generally entitled to take all offerings in cash made within the temple precincts in open cups and plates, but that he shall not been entitled to appropriate for his own use such cash offerings as are made by worshippers for some other specific or general purpose stipulated in that form. It was stated that as per the terms of this clause, in general, all cash offerings made within the temple precincts can be appropriated by the Archaka unless the offerings are for any other specific or general purpose stipulated, that is, either for the Temple or to perform any festival or for any express purpose. It was contended that this clause does not authorize or give rise to appellant to instal any 'Hundi' to collect the general offerings and that, if the 'Hundial' is installed, the 'sevarthis' would put their general offerings as well, only in the 'Hundial' and the respondent will be deprived of his earnings, which he was legally entitled to. It was also, pleaded that the respondent is not paid any salary by the Temple authority. It was disclosed in the plaint that there were several 'sannidhis' in the Temple like Devanthar Sannidhi, Thaayar Sannidhi, Desikar Sannidhi and Hayagriver Sannidhi. In Sannidhis, pooja and araadhana have to be performed simultaneously. Since the respondent is the only Archaka-cum-Sthanika in the Temple, has to employ several persons for pooja and araadhana in various Sannidhis and he has to pay and feed all of them. In the 'Hayagriver shrine' and the Temple in the hill top which is attached to the appellant Temple, till now no 'Hundial' is installed and the entire cash offerings is taken only by the respondent.

(3.) On 26-9-1988, the appellant attempted to instal a 'Hundial' in the said temple precincts contrary to the terms of the scheme and this was objected to by the respondent. In the meanwhile, there was a panchayat to be conduced within a week and appellant served two notices on the respondent on 27-9-1988 stating the reasons why the 'Hundial' was to be placed. Pursuant thereto, the suit has been filed for permanent injunction as stated earlier.