EXECUTIVE OFFICER SRI KALLALAGAR DEVASTHANAM ALAGARKOIL HAVING HIS OFFICE AT ALAGARKOIL MADURAI Vs. THOLAPPA IYENGAR ALIAS ALAGAR IYENGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 6th defendant-Executive Officer of Sri Kallalagar Devasthanam, Alagarkoil is the appellant. THE suit by the 1st respondent-2nd plaintiff and the deceased 1st plaintiff is for declaration that the plaintiffs are entitled to keep undial in the Samayamandapam constructed by the plaintiffs' ancestors for collections during Chitrai Festival and appropriate the said collections to themselves and for consequential permanent injunction against the defendants.

(2.) THE 1st plaintiff died pending suit. His only heir was impleaded as the 7th defendant in the suit, who is the 7th respondent in this appeal. THE said 7th respondent is not making any claim. THE 2nd plaintiff alone pursued the suit claim.

(3.) NEXTLY, coming to the above said question of notice under S. 80, C.P.C. no doubt I find that the decision in 1989-1-L.W. 361 referred to above conflicts with the above said decision in 1971 II M.L.J. 495. There are also other decisions of single Judges of this Court following the above said 1971 H.M.L.J. 495. They are (1) Commissioner H.R.& C.E. v. Kacherichamy 1 , (2) His Holiness S.S.S.V.D.Y. Mahadesikan v. Commissioner, H.R.&C.E. 2 (it was this decision which was reversed in 1989-1 L.W. 361 D.B. referred to above) and (3) S.N. Chinna Kandar v. Commissioner, H.R.& C.E. 3, Madras.