N NATARAJ Vs. GANGAWAR MAHAJANA TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOR a disposal of this revision, some background facts may be stated. Gangawar Mahajana Trust, which is a charitable trust, instituted a suit O.S. No. 76 of 1966 in the District Munsif's Court, Coimbatore against two persons, for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from preventing the entry of the plaintiff trust or any of its members in the temple for holding their meetings, celebrating their festivals and the like. The suit was opposed by the defendants. Although the relief claimed was for a bare injunction, the learned District Munsif appears to have covered a wider field at the trial having regard to the details of the pleadings between the parties. One of the issues raised in the suit by the trial Court was: "Whether the Gangawar Mahajana Trust is entitled to or has any interest in Mahali Amman temple or its premises?" The learned District Munsif answered this issue in favour of the plaintiff and also granted a permanent injunction as prayed for by the plaintiff. The 2nd defendant preferred an appeal before the Sub-Court, Coimbatore. The Sub-Court, while affirming the decree of the trial Court on the issue as to the relief of permanent injunction, declined to go into the question of title raised by the issue extracted by me earlier. On the last part of the decision of the Sub-Court, the plaintiff felt aggrieved and carried the matter in second appeal before this Court. Ismail, J., as he then was, while disposing of Gangawar Mahajana Trust v. N. Natarajan1, observed that the Sub-Court was technically right in holding that the issue as to title did not properly arise in the suit, which was one for a bare injunction and nothing more. Nevertheless, the learned Judge thought fit to remand the case to the Sub-Court for a decision on the question as to title, since in the opinion of the learned Judge, it was proper not to drive the parties to a separate suit on the question of title. While making his order of remand in the manner aforesaid, the learned Judge also incidentally directed that if by reason of the Court below going into the question of title, there was any liability for payment of court-fee in respect of the property, the deficient court-fee on that basis may be collected from the parties both in respect of the plaint and in respect of the memorandum of first appeal.

(2.) AFTER this remand, the matter came before the Sub-Court for a disposal, afresh on the issue of title. At that stage, a question was mooted as to the court-fee payable on the relief as to title. The 2nd defendant, who is the petitioner in this revision, then moved the Sub-Court for the appointment of a Commissioner to ascertain the market value of the temple and its precincts, so that the proper court-fee may be determined on the relief as to the declaration title. This application was dismissed by the Sub-Court by order, dated 24th October, 1977. It is this order which has been brought before this Court in revision.

(3.) ALTHOUGH the Full Bench had clearly expressed that they were not deciding the question referred to them, the expressions, of opinion of the learned Judges, which I nave briefly summarised in the foregoing paragraph, show clearly the nature of the temple as a species of property, particularly in relation to the fiscal provisions of the Court-fees Act. The opinion uniformly expressed by the learned Judges is to the effect that it would be inapt to regard a temple as a marketable property having or possessing a market value as such. It is also clear that a trustee of a temple, or any one making a claim to the office of a trustee of a temple, thereby does not have, or claim, any interest in any property as owner. The temple properties are, in the strict sense, the properties of the idol. The temple as such, as an item of property, also belongs to the idol and the ownership cannot be attributed to the trustee either of the temple as such or other temple properties merely for the reason that as trustee, he has the power and the authority to manage and administer those properties.