SUBHASH CHANDRA NAIK Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ Appeal Nos. 2818 and 2819 of 2010 is filed against the order dated 11-6-2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 7167 and 7168 of 2009. Writ Appeal Nos. 2761 and 2762 of 2010 is also filed against the aforesaid order. While the first of the aforesaid cases is filed by the first Petitioner in the aforementioned writ petitions and the second of the writ appeals are filed by the second Petitioner in the aforesaid writ petitions. Writ Appeal Nos. 3113 of 2010 and 3125 of 2010 is filed by the third Respondent in the aforementioned writ petitions. Since these writ appeals arise out of the common order passed in the writ petitions, they have been heard together and disposed of by this common order.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to in terms of their status before the learned Single Judge.

(3.) A temple by name Polali Rajarajeshwari Temple which is claimed to be one of the oldest temple in the District of Dakshina Kannada and classified as 'A' Grade Temple has four hereditary trustees hailing from different families. Two of them are from Bunt Families, known as Ullipady Guttu and Ammumje Guttu. The other two hereditary trustees are said to be belonging to the family of Archakas and the family of Thantri respectively. The four Hereditary Trustees have to elect the Managing Trustee from amongst them. According to the Petitioners for the last several decades, the Managing Trusteeship used to be held from among Ullipady Guttu and Ammunje Guttu families. In the year 1942, one Sri Ramanath Maria succeeded to the post of Hereditary Trustee of the Temple from Ullipady Guttu family when he was part of the Ullipady joint family and was residing at Malali Village and succeeded to the Hereditary Trusteeship under the Aliya Santhana Law. That the third Respondent and his mother had filed O.S. No. 31 of 1950, before the subordinate Civil Judge, Mangalore and by judgment and decree dated 31-3-1953, the third Respondent and his mother and others had taken their share and separated from Ullipady Guttu Family as also on the basis of award also passed in the said litigation viz., RIA No. 1165 of 1952. According to the Petitioners, apart from determining the shares in the respective properties owned by the Ullipady Guttu family, one of the issues involved was with regard to the Hereditary Trusteeship, apart from certain customary obligations and liabilities which were to be performed by the person who inherited, the Hereditary Trusteeship, in the form of 'Viniyoga' and also performing obligations at Polali Temple and also at Ullipady Guttu house which includes the performance of Daivadakola periodically. According to the Petitioners, after the demise of Sri Ramanath Maria, Akkamma's successors were allotted the trusteeship of the temple and in view of the decree of partition her successor was Sri Ramesh Naik-4th Respondent who became the hereditary trustee. It is the case of the Petitioners that on the death of Ramanath Maria, Sri Ramesh Naik who succeeded to the Hereditary Trusteeship could not have transferred the trusteeship to a non-member of joint family without the consent and concurrence of the family members i.e., descendants of Akkamma Naik who are as follows: (a) Sri Ramesh Naik; (b) Sri Subhash Chandra Naik; (c) Sri Jayaram Alva; (d) Sri Arunkumar Alva; (e) Suresh Naik; (f) Sri Uday Kumar Alva and (g) Sri Kiran Kumar Alva.