S V KALLABIRAN PILLAI Vs. KPERIA VENKATARAMANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application to revise the order of the Subordinate Judge of Tinnevelly under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code. In this case, the plaintiffs brought a suit order Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act to recover possession of a temple building on the strength of title as trustees from the Vanamamalai Jeer and his servants who dispossessed them. The defendants contended "that the plaintiffs were neither trustees of the temple nor the hereditary Archahas of temple, that they were merely ordinary servants in Perumal temple and the shrines attached thereto and that they were removed for misconduct by the first defendant, the deer, and that they were not entitled to recover possession of the temple.

(2.) The Subordinate Judge held that the plaintiffs were not the trustees of the plaint temple and that first defendant was the trustee and that the Archakaship of the plaint Hanumar temple was hereditarily vested in the plaintiffs, family. He also found that "the plaintiffs were in possession as Archakas and in the exercise of their right as Archakas and not as trustees of the temple" and that " they were in a sense dispossessed within six months prior to suit."

(3.) The decretal portion of the judgment runs thus: "There will be a decree only for qualified possession and not exclusive absolute possession, namely, possession which Archakas are entitled by law to have for the proper discharge of their duties.