PRAYAG DOSS JI VARU, MAHANT Vs. SRIRANGACHARLUVARU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The temple of Sri Venkateswara in Tirumalai or Tirupati in the North Arcot District is a very ancient Hindu Temple to which worshippers resort from all parts of India, and is in receipt of an annual income of between 2 and 3 lakhs of rupees. Prior to the establishment of the British Government, the management of the institution was directly under the ruler of the country for the time being. After the advent of the British, the management passed into the hands of the East India Company, and subsequent to the enactment of Regulation VII of 1817 of the Madras Code, it was carried on under the control of the Board of Revenue through the Collector of the District. With reference to a despatch of the year 1841 from the Court of Directors ordering the immediate withdrawal from all interference on the part of officers of Government with native temples and places of religious resort, the management of the temple was in 1843 made over to Seva Doss, the head of a Mutt called Hathiramji Mutt situated in the town of Tirupati at the base of the hill on which the important shrine stands. In the sanad by which this transfer of management, was effected, it was provided that Seva Doss's successors in the Mutt should be his successors as Vicharanakarta or Manager of the temple. Seva Doss having died in 1864,Darma Doss succeeded hitn, and, on Darma Doss's death in 1880, Bagavan Doss became manager and continued so till 1890. From 1890 to (sic) Mahabir Doss was manager. And from 1895 to 1900 Ramakisore Doss, the defendant in the two suits Nos. 31 of 1898 and 10 of 1899 on the file of the North Arcot District Court, held the management; and on his death, pending the litigation, the present Mahant, as the head of the Mutt is styled, succeeded to the office of the manager, and was brought on record as the legal representative of Ramakisore.

(2.) Now, when in 1843 the management was transferred to Seva Doss, it was, no doubt, expected that the management by the Mahant would prove satisfactory, but the history of what took place subsequent to Seva Doss's death is, to put it shortly, a record of waste and embezzlement.

(3.) Persons interested in the institution were not slow to bring the misconduct of the managers to the notice of the authorities. A suit was brought against Darma Doss, the second manager, charging him with misconduct and malversation. The charges were established and the District Court gave a decree against him. On appeal the decree was confirmed, and this Court taking a less lenient view than the District Judge, came to the conclusion that Darma Doss's misconduct was traudulent and such as to justify his dismissal; but the dismissal was not ordered for the reason that it was apprehended that his successor might not prove a better manager See Chinna Jiyan Garula Varu V/s. Durma Dossji, 5 Mad. Jur. 214 :-Ed. In spite of this, the third manager Bagavan Doss's acts of mismanagement, which were many, were also made the subject of judicial proceedings. A charge of criminal misappropriation with reference to a quantity of gold coins belonging to the temple of the value of over 2 lakhs of rupees was instituted against him, and, after a prolonged trial, he was convicted by the Sessions Court of North Arcot and sentenced to 18 months imprisonment. It was pending his incarceration under that sentence, that Mahabir with Bagavan Doss's permission, took charge of the management of the temple. The record shows that allegations of malversation were made against him as well and proceedings taken, but owing to his death, they were not prosecuted further.