SUBRAMANIA PILLAI Vs. SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA IN COUNCIL, REPRESENTED BY THE COLLECTOR OF TINNEVELLY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs in the suit opt of which these appeals arise are the trustses of the Kuthalanathaswami temple of Courtallam, the defendant being the Secrtary of State for India. The plaintiffs sue to establish their title to about three acres of land lying immediately to the south of what are admittedly the temple premises, demarcated as S. No. 482 of Courtallum village. The land sued for is valueless for cultivation purposes but its importance lies in the fact that it contains the famous Courtallum water-fall and bathing pool, and sundry mantapams and sacred sites adjacent thereto. The plaintiff claim the site in virtue of immemorial possession as part of the temple precincts and also by adverse possession for more than the statutory period. The defendant denies that there has been any exclusive or adverse possession of any portion of the disputed site on the part of the plaintiffs, and further pleads that by virtue of its inclusion in block No. Ill of the Tenkasi reserved forest in 1883 all pre-existing rights which may have existed have become extinguished

(2.) The learned Subordinate Judge has found that only a portion of the disputed site falls within the reserved forest. The excluded portion contains the bathing pool, the lower portion of the hill-side immediately above it and the various mantapams; and in his decree, he recgnizes the temple's title to the following: A. The whole of the site below the pool including the Sandhyavandana Mantapam and the site of the Kasilingaswami shrine destroyed by flood in 1891 (Nos. 5 and 4 on the plan, Exhibit P.) B. The bridge (No. 10). C. The Tirthavari Mantapam and its verandahs on the eastern side (Nos. 6 and 7.) D. The site of the foot of the water-fall. E. The pool itself (No. 2). F. The rock above the falls on which the Sivalingams are cut.

(3.) He also recognizes its right to carry on the customary puja at the falls and at the Tirthavari Mantapam and the necessary right of way from the bridge to the foot of the falls and to the pool called Pongumakadul half way up the hill. The rest of the plaintiff's claim is dismissed and the decree further declares that the water-fall itself, the remainder of the hill- slopes, and the river bed belong to Government subject to the bathing rights of the European community and high-caste public, conformably to the rights of the temple to carry on customary worship.