SUBRAMANIAN Vs. ARULMIGHU RENGANATHA SWAMY TEMPLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff who has lost before the Courts below, has preferred the above appeal.

(2.) The suit was filed for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the suit property either by auctioning the property or in any other manner except by due process of law.

(3.) It is averred in the plaint that the suit property originally belonged to Arulmighu Idol of Udayavar, which is an independent shrine within the precincts of the Arulmighu Renganatha Swamy Temple. The Udayavar Shrine was originally managed by a hereditary trustee. During his life time, it was let out as a vacant site to the plaintiff and through his efforts and labour, the plaintiff claims to have raised coconut trees in a portion of the suit property and has been doing cultivation in the other portion. The plaintiff claims to be in possession of the suit property for over 25 years as a cultivating tenant. The said trustee of the Udayavar Shrine was unable to administer the Shrine and its properties. Hence, he handed over the possession and administration to the defendant-Temple. After handing over the Temple, the defendant had entered into a lease agreement with the plaintiff. It is also claimed by the plaintiff that the property was leased out to him for the purpose of cultivation and that the rights and liabilities would be governed by the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, pertaining to lease of immovable property. The plaintiff claims that he had been regular in payment of lease rent and the defendant has also issued proper receipts for the same. While so, on 14.06.2007, the defendant issued a pamphlet for public auction of the usufructs of the trees in the suit property. As the plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the suit property as a cultivating tenant, the defendant has got no right to auction the usufructs of the trees in the suit property.