A.K. VAVALLEVVAI MARICAIR DHARMAM, REPRESENTED BY A.K.V. AHAMED MARICAIR SOLE AND MANAGING TRUSTEE Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU REPRESENTED BY THE COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Authorised Officer, Nagapattinam, took proceedings under Section 9 of the Tamil Nadu Act LVIII of 1961 in, respect of the lands held by a trust called A. K. Vavallavai Maricair Dharmam, Nagore, and declared an extent of 21 -88 standard acres as surplus by a draft statement under Section 10(1) of the Act. Against such a declaration, the managing trustee of the said trust filed an appeal and in that appeal the draft statement issued by the Authorised Officer was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Authorised Officer for fresh disposal. After remand the Authorised Officer took up the matter for fresh enquiry. Before the Authorised Officer, the managing trustee, one Ahamed Maricair, was examined as P.W. 1. He deposed that the trust was created by his father A. K. Varalebbai Maricair in 1934, that the object of the trust was to hold fatihas and conduct public feedings and moulds (ceremonies) during the months of Mohurrum and Rabiyul Avval of the Arabic era. He also filed the trust deed, Exhibit P -1 to show that the trust created by the document is of religious nature. He also produced accounts relating to the trust, Exhibits P -3 to P -11 and P -19 as also Exhibit P -2, a partition deed under which some more properties have been set apart for the trust erected by Exhibit P -1. The Authorised Officer, after considering the recitals in the trust deed and the oral evidence of P.W. 1, held that the trust in question is not entitled to be declared as a public trust of religious nature, that the trust created under. Exhibit P -1 is only of a charitable nature and that therefore, the trust is not entitled to claim exemption in relation to the lands held by it under Section 2 of the said Act. There was an appeal to the Tribunal by the managing trustee. That appeal having failed, the trustee has come before this Court.

(2.) BEFORE me it is contended that the objects set out in the trust deed, Exhibit P -1 are of religious nature, and therefore, the trust should be taken to come within the scope of Section 2 of the Act. The learned Counsel has taken me through the recitals in the trust deed, Exhibit P -1, and also the evidence of P.W. 1, the managing trustee, who has deposed as to the purpose for which the income from the trust is spent. According to the learned Counsel, since the object of the trust was to run a madarasa wherein Muslim girls and boys are given religious lectures and also lessons in Koran, the trust deed should be taken to be of religious nature.

(3.) THOUGH the order of the Tribunal refers to various charitable objects as being performed by the trustees, we have to decide the nature of the trust created under Exhibit P -1, only with reference to the objects specified therein and not with reference to the objects actually performed now as deposed by P.W. 1. The object specified in Exhibit P -1 is to run a madarasa where Muslim girls and boys are given lessons in Koran and also given lectures in Islamic religion. The actual words used in Exhibit P -1 are: