MATAM NADIPUDI KOTI VEERAYA ALIAS SAMBHUDEVARA ALIAS SAMBHU SWAMULAVARU Vs. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR HINDU RELIGIOUS ENDOWMENTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appeal No. 144 of 1932 - In this appeal the Court is called upon to decide whether a mutt in the village of Chebrole, Guntur District, is a mutt within the purview of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1926 and as such is liable to make an annual contribution to the funds of the Board of Commissioners appointed under the Act. The appellants claim that the mutt does not constitute a public religious endowment. They say that it is entirely private in its nature and therefore it cannot be called upon in law to make any contribution. The Board having decided that the mutt is liable to make an annual payment, the suit out of which this appeal arises was filed by the appellants in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Guntur for a declaration to the effect that the Board has no right to make a levy. The learned Judge agreed with the Board and dismissed the suit.

(2.) The appellants are brothers and are members of the sect known as Jangams or Vira Saivas. They worship the Lingam or symbol of Shiva which they wear suspended round the neck. According to " the manual of the Nellore District" compiled by John A.C. Boswell, Collector of Kistna District in 1873, there are five seats of the principal priests of this sect, namely, (1) Gokarna Matam at Nizampatam; (2) Vibhuti Matam at Bangalore; (3) Saranga Matam at Srisailam; (4) Tota Matam in Plyderabad; and (5) Chebrole Matam at Chebrole. The Chebrole Matam is the mutt with which the suit is concerned. When it was founded is not known, but the evidence in this case shows that it was in existence in 1775, since when the members of the appellants family have been entirely responsible for its management. It has been the custom for the head of the family for the time being or its members to choose a male member to be the head of the mutt. The person so chosen is required to take a vow of celibacy and is known as the Sambhu Devara. The Sambhu Devara receives the veneration not only of the members of his family, but of a large number of disciples to whom he gives religious instruction. The disciples do not live with him in the mutt, but in their own villages, many of them, of course, visiting the mutt;., from time to time. It is the custom for the Sambhu Devara to pay visits to his disciples periodically. In these visitations he is usually assisted by the male members of his family, who themselves at times visit the discipfes without him. The mutt is divided into three parts. In one part the Sambhu Devara lives and receives his disciples. In the second part are the residential quarters of the other members of the family and the kitchen. The third part consists of a courtyard in which there are the tombs of ancestors of the appellants who have held the office of Sambhu Devara. These tombs are ten in number and are regarded as shrines. Within the mutt premises the daily worship of the Lingam takes place and from time to time religious rites are performed at the tombs of the departed Sambhu Devaras. It is not suggested that these religious observances are confined to the first appellant and the members of his family. They are, in fact, participated in by members of the sect generally. The first plaintiff is the present Sambhu Devara. The mutt is maintained out of the income of lands situate in the villages of Koilmudi and Penumudi. The appellants claim that these properties do not constitute endowments of the mutt, but are in fact properties privately owned by the family. The appellants case turns on the answer to this question.

(3.) Section 9(7) of the Act defines the word "mutt". It means: An institution for the promotion of the Hindu religion presided over by a person whose duty is to engage himself in spiritual service or who exercises or claims to exercise spiritual headship over a body of disciples and succession to whose office devolves in accordance with the directions of the founder of the institution or is regulated by usage; and includes places of religious worship other than a temple or places of religious instruction which are appurtenant to such institution.