ANGUDU NARASIMHALU CHETTIAR Vs. T V SELVARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal had been preferred against the order passed in Application No. 5524/90 in C.S. No. 153/1990. In that application, respondents 1 to 3 herein, who had been impleaded as parties to C.S. No. 153/1990 and who are defendants 4 to 6 in C.S. No. 2889/1990 on the file of V Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras prayed under Clause 13 of the Letters Patent that this court should withdraw O.S. No. 2889 of 1990, V Assistant City Civil Judge's Court, Madras, to the file of the Original Side of this Court, to be taken up and tried along with C.S. No. 153 of 1990. In the affidavit filed in support of that application, respondents 1 to3 have set out the circumstances leading to the institution of O.S. No. 2889 of 190 and C.S. No. 153 of 1990 and stated that the question that arose for consideration in both the suits was the character of Sri Prasanna Venkatesa Perumal Temple, Mettupalayam, viz., whether it is a denomination temple or public temple and that with a view to avoid conflict of decisions in the determination of the common issues of fact and law involved in both the suits, O.S. No. 2889 of 1990 should be withdrawn to the file of the Original Side of this Court to be tried along with C.S. No. 153 of 1990 now pending before this Court. The appellants, in their counter, opposed the prayer for transfer on the ground that the identity of issues arising for decisions in the suit on the original side of this court in C.S. No. 153 of 1990 and in O.S. No. 2889 of 1990 V Asst. City Civil Court, Madras, instituted under S. 70 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endownments Act, would not justify the transfer prayed for. The application for transfer filed by respondent 1 to 3 was also characterised as one intended to delay the proceedings.

(2.) THE learned Judge took the view that a common question arose for decision in both the suits, viz., whether the temple in question is a denominational temple belonging to Balija Community or a public temple and that eventhough O.S. No. 2889 of 1990 had been instituted under S. 70 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endownments Act, that does not in any manner fetter the power conferred on this Court under Clause 13 of the Letters Patent, to remove and try and determine any suit, inclusive of suits like O.S. No. 2889 of 1990, and further that, when the controversy to be tried and resolved is common in both the suits, in the interests of justice and equity and also with a view to avoid conflict of decisions, both the suits should be tried and disposed of by the same court. Ultimately, Application No. 5524 of 1990 was allowed and the suit O.S. No. 2889 of 1990 along with an interlocutory application therein, were withdrawn and transferred to the file of this Court, to be tried along with C.S. No. 153 of 1990. Aggrieved by this order of transfer of the suit O.S. No. 2889 of 1990 to the file of this court, on the Original Side, in the exercise of powers conferred under Clause 13 of the Letters Patent, the appellants have preferred this appeal.