SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1961 Supreme(SC) 115

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
16th March, 1961
P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR AND K.N. WANCHOO, JJ.
P. V. Bheemsena Rao, Appellant
Versus
Sirigiri Pedda Yella Reddi and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 752 of 1957.
Advocates appeared
MR. A V. Viswanatha Sastri, Senior Advocate, (Mr. T. V. R. Tatachari, Advocate, with him), for Appellant; Mr. P. Somasundaram, Senior Advocate (Mr. T. Satyanarayana Advocate, with him), for Respondents.

Advocates:
A.V.VISHWANATHA SASTRI, P.S.NAYAR, T.SATYANARAYANA, T.V.R.TATACHARI

S. 44-B (1) of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1927, does not apply to personal inams burdened with service to a temple.

Headnote:

MADRAS HINDU RELIGIOUS ENDOWMENTS ACT - S. 44-B (1) - PERSONAL INAM BURDENED WITH SERVICE TO TEMPLE - NOT WITHIN S. 44-B (1).

Fact of the Case:

The dispute arose from an inam grant made to the ancestors of the plaintiffs-respondents for performing parak service in the pagodas of village Panyam. The grantees alienated a considerable portion of the land and ceased to perform the service. The trustees of the temples applied for resumption of the lands and their re-grant to the temples under S. 44-B (2) (a) (i) and (ii) of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1927.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the inam was a personal inam burdened with service to the temple and not a service inam. Therefore, it did not fall within the ambit of S. 44-B (1) of the Act.

Issues: Whether a personal inam, burdened with service to a temple, can be said to come within the meaning of the words "any inam granted for the performance of a service connected with a temple" under S. 44-B (1) of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1927.

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted S. 44-B (1) of the Act in light of its history and the amendment to Board's Standing Order 54. It held that S. 44-B (1) was intended to cover only those inams which were granted directly to the temple, inams granted for the performance of a charity or service connected with a math or temple, and inams the whole income of which was meant for charity. Personal inams burdened with service were not included within the ambit of S. 44-B (1) and continued to be governed by B.S.O. 54, class (b).

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the decision of the High Court was upheld.

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The appeal raised the question of the interpretation of S. 44-B (1) of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1927. (!) - The court found that the inam was a personal inam burdened with service to the temple and not a service inam. (!) - The court held that S. 44-B (1) does not apply to personal inams burdened with service to a temple. (!) - The court interpreted S. 44-B (1) in light of its history and the amendment to Board's Standing Order 54. (!) - It held that S. 44-B (1) was intended to cover only inams granted directly to the temple, inams granted for the performance of a charity or service connected with a math or temple, and inams the whole income of which was meant for charity. (!) - Personal inams burdened with service were not included within the ambit of S. 44-B (1) and continued to be governed by B.S.O. 54, class (b). (!) (!) - The appeal was dismissed, and the decision of the High Court was upheld. (!)

What is the interpretation of S. 44-B (1) of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1927 regarding "any inam granted for the performance of a service connected with a temple"? [p_1]


Judgment

WANCHOO, J. : This appeal on a certificate granted by the Andhra Pradesh High Court raises the question of the interpretation of S. 44-B (1) of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, No. II of 1927 (hereinafter called the Act). The point arises in this way. The property in dispute was originally granted in inam to the ancestors of the predecessors-in-interest of the plaintiffs-respondents for the performance of parak service in the pagodas (temples) of village Panyam in Nandyal Taluk of the Kurnool District. The grantees of the land in this inam alienated a considerable portion of it and also ceased of perform the parak service. In consequence, the trustees of the temples at Panyam, applied to the Sub-Collector under S. 44-B (2) (a) (i) and (ii) of the Act for the resumption of the lands and their re-grant to the temples on the ground that the holders of the inam had alienated the property and had failed to perform the service required of them. An inquiry was conducted into these allegations, and it was held by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandyal, that the inam had been granted on the condition of parak service being rendered and that there had been breach of the condition on failure to perform the service and also that the lands comprised in the inam had been alienated in a manner falling within S. 44-B (2) (a) (i) of the Act. On these findings the resumption of the inam lands was ordered and the inam was re-granted to the temples in Panyam village. The alienees took the matter in appeal to the Collector but failed. Thereupon they filed the suit out of which the present appeal has arisen; and their main contention was that the revenue authorities had no jurisdiction to order the resumption of the inam, under S. 440B. the suit was resisted by the trustees who were defendants to it and their case was that the inam was a religious service inam in the sense of being emoluments for the performance of service and alternatively that even if the grant was a personal inam, burdened with the performance of parak service, the grant was conditional on the performance of the service and as there was breach of this obligation, the resumption and re-grant were justified under S. 440B.

2. Certain preliminary facts are not in dispute now. It has been found by all the courts that the inam grant comprised both the warams. It has also been found that the grant to the inamdar was personal to him though burdened with parak service and not a service inam in the sense of the inam constituting emoluments of any office. On the finding that the inam was a personal inam burdened with service to the temple the trial court held that the case did not fall within S. 44-B of the Act. On appeal the district court confirmed the decree of the trial Court. In the High Court on second appeal the finding as to the inam being of both warams was not contested and it was conceded that it was a personal inam burdened with service. The only question that was agitated there was whether the case would fall within the four corners of S. 44-B even if the inam which was granted in the present case was a personal inam of both warams burdened with service to the temple. The High Court held against the trustees and dismissed the appeal. Thereupon the trustees who are the appellants before us applied for a certificate which was granted to them; and that is how the matter has come up before us.

3. Section 44-B (1) is in these terms:-

"Any exchange, gift, sale or mortgage, and any lease for a term exceeding five years, of the whole or any portion of any inam granted for the performance of a charity or service connected with a math or temple and made, confirmed or recognised by the British Government, shall be null and void."

4. The question for consideration is whether a personal inam, burdened with service to a temple can be said to come within the meaning of the words "any inam granted for the performance of a service connected with a temple"./ It is urged that the








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top