T.E. VIJAYARARAGHAVAN AND ORS. Vs. THE COMMISSIONER, HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Writ Petition is filed by an individual for himself and on behalf of Tengalai Adhyapaka Mirasidars, which is one of the sects professing Vaishnavism in Kancheepuram. Originally the Writ Petition was filed against the Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Chennai and the Executive Officer, Vilakkoli Perumal (Deepa Prakasar) Sri Vedantha Desikar Thirukkoil, Little Kancheepuram for issuing a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Official Respondents to forthwith obey and implement the Judgment and Decree of the Division Bench of this Court dated 18.7.1918 made in C.M.A. No. 221 of 1917 thereby reversing the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Appellate Court made in A.S. No. 443 of 1915 dated 31.3.1917 and restoring the Judgment and Decree of the Trial Court made in O.S. No. 414 of 1908 dated 15.5.1915. The Suit in O.S. No. 414 of 1908 was filed by the individual Plaintiffs representing Tengalai Sri Vaishnava Brahmins, residents of Kancheepuram against the individual defendants belonging to Vadagalai Sri Vaishnava Brahmins of Kancheepuram and against the trustees of the Second Respondent -Temple in respect of Adhyapakam Miras right in the said Temple as declared by the High Court in S.A. Nos. 1146, 1147, 1148 & 1423 of 1889 arising out of O.S. No. 295 of 1889 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Chengalpet. There are two sects in Vaishnavism (i) Vadagalai, and (ii) Tengalai sects. Vadagalai sect consists of the followers of Swami Vedhantha Desikan and Tengalai sect consists of the followers of Sri Manavala Mamunigal. The recitation of 4000 Tamil verses of Dhivya Prabhandham sung by 12 Alwars being done in the Vishnu Temples, is common to both sects. Both the sects claimed independent right regarding the mantram to be chanted at the recitation of Prabandham in connection with the worship in the Temple and the Shrines attached thereto and in the processions. While Tengalai sect claimed "Sree Sailesa Thayapathram" as mantram to be chanted, before starting recitation of Prabandham, according to Vadagalai sect, the recitation of Dhiva Prabhandham should start with the mantram of "Ramanuja Dhayapathram". Vadagalai has no right to recite any mantram, Prabandham or Vazhi Thirunamam, except to take part in Adhyapakam service as ordinary worshippers and to join Tengalai Mirasidars in Adhyapakam service and to recite the same mantram, same Prabandham and same Vazhi Thirunamam as Tengalai Mirasidars, that too without forming separate Ghosti. The Suit in O.S. No. 414/1908 was filed by the individual Plaintiffs belonging to Tengalai sect for certain rights as stated above and for consequential Injunction restraining Vadagalai from reciting any mantram, Prabandham or Vazhi Thirunamam either during worship inside or outside the Temple or during procession except as ordinary worshippers.

(2.) THE Suit was seriously resisted by the contesting individuals belonging to Vadagalai Brahmins. During the pendency of the Suit in O.S. No. 414 of 1908, similar Suit in O.S. No. 10 of 1906 relating to Adhyapakam miras in the Temple of Devarajaswami at Kancheepuram was disposed of by the District Court, Chengalpet on 31.12.1909 and the same was thereafter questioned before the High Court by way of First Appeal in A.S. No. 175 of 1910 and the High Court by Judgment dated 15.1.1913 modified the Judgment of the District Court, Chengalpet. In view of the modified Judgment of the High Court in the identical case, the parties in O.S. No. 414 of 1908 arrived at a settlement to have similar Decree as that of the Decree made in O.S. No. 10 of 1906 as modified in A.S. No. 175 of 1910 by the High Court.

(3.) AGGRIEVED against the same, the Defendants therein preferred an Appeal in A.S. No. 443 of 1915 and the Appeal was allowed on 31.3.1917 by setting aside the Judgment and Decree of the Trial Court and the case was remanded back to the Trial Court to dispose of the same afresh according to law and on merits. The correctness of the same was challenged by the Plaintiffs by way of further Appeal in C.M.A. No. 221 of 1917 before this Court and the Appeal was allowed on 18.7.1918 by setting aside the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Appellate Court and by restoring the Judgment and Decree of the Trial Court as stated above.