Headnote:
Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 - Sections 18,18(1),66,70,72(4),2(13),2(17) – Application - Whether at (East Khandesh) was a private or a public religious trust - deity of his worship was. Although the origin of is dipped somewhat in antiquity and direct testimony was lacking it has never been disputed that constructed a temple in year 1817 at and installed aforesaid deity according to religious rites - He also acquired certain properties and the said temple with properties constituted - Had movable property of the value of and immovable properties of value of and average gross annual income as well as average annual expenditure was - After passing of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 an application under Section 18 of that Act was filed by three persons and as constituted attorneys of who was described in application as owner of property - Word Buwa means saint - Application was made on May 29, 1952, to the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Poona, under protest and without prejudice to the claim made therein that the was not a public trust – Whether it was private or public endowment. - Whether a temple is a public temple or a private temple - Held, When once it is understood that true beneficiaries of religious endowments are not the idols but the worshippers, and that the purpose of the endowment is the maintenance of that worship for benefit of worshiper question whether an endowment is private or public presents no difficulty - Cardinal point to be decided is whether it was intention of the founder that specified individuals are to have right of worship at shrine or general public or any specified portion thereof - In accordance with this theor, it has been held that when property is dedicated for the worship of a family idol, it is a private and not a public endowment, as the persons who are entitled to worship at the shrine of deity can only be members of family and that is an ascertained group of individuals - But where beneficiaries are not members of a family or a specified individual then endowment can only be regarded as a public intended to benefit general body of worshipers - Court will have to resolve controversy about character of trust on documentary evidence if any, object and purpose for which trust was created consistent manner in which he property has been dealt with or managed by those in charge manner in which property has long been used by the public contribution of public to all intents and purpose, as a matter of right without the least interference or restriction from the temple authorities to foster maintenance of the worship, the accretion to the trust property by way of grants from the State or gifts from outsiders inconsistent with the private nature of the trust, the nature of devolution of the property, are all important elements in determination of the question whether a property is a private or a public religious endowment – Court are satisfied that in this case all the above tests are fulfilled - All Buwas are saints. People go for darshan because these people were saints - This is based on the principle of - This property goes from Guru to his Shishya - residents of the place where the Bhajans are performed attend these Bhajans. In the days of fair the Maharaj remains present. He stays there for about 4 months - During his stay at Bhajans are performed daily - During the fair his Shishyas perform the Bhajans. While returning from the pilgrimage also he performs Bhajans. Maharaj also attends other fairs at Nasik etc - At that time also his Shishyas accompany him. By Shishyas I mean the disciples as well as followers. Shishyas are few but followers are in large numbers. In at many saints of other places, Shishyas and followers take part - Persons who attend this year besides shishyas and followers are about ten thousand - followers and saints are paid their cost of journey. All their expenses of boarding and loading are met by this - Bhajans at performed by Maharaj are attended by public - Appeal dismissed.

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The judgment determines that Shri. Vithal Rukhamai Sansthan is a public trust under Section 2(13) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act (!) . - It discusses the distinction between private and public trusts, emphasizing that true beneficiaries are worshippers, and whether the founder intended rights of worship for specified individuals or the general public (!) (!) . - It cites tests for public vs private endowments including documentary evidence, object and purpose, management, long use by public, public contribution, and gifts/grants from the State or outsiders, etc. (!) . - It notes specific historical documents (Sanad 1863, various Varaspatras, gift deeds Exs. 35, 37–39, 41) and their interpretation in establishing public nature rather than private ownership (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - It records admission by a constituted attorney that the temple is meant for public darshan and worship, contributing to the public temple characterization [reference 7 p_7-8]. - It lists features supporting public trust: indeterminate Hindu public worship, long-standing public worship, land granted in the name of Devasthan, gifts from public, public celebrations, and absence of private ownership history (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The final holding: appeal dismissed; Sansthan is a public religious endowment under the Act (!) (!) .

What is the classification of Shri. Vithal Rukhamai Sansthan at Amalner as private Devasthan or public religious trust?

What are the criteria and documentary evidence used to determine whether a temple endowment is private or public under the Bombay Public Trusts Act?

JUDGMENT

P. K. GOSWAMI, J.:— The question that arises in this appeal by special leave is whether Shri. Vithal Rukhamai Sansthan at Amalner (East Khandesh) was a private Devasthan or a public religious trust.

2. There was a saint endowed with spiritual powers by the name of Sakharam Maharaj at Amalner. The deity of his worship was Shri. Vithal Rukhamai. Although the origin of the Sansthan is dipped somewhat in antiquity and direct testimony was lacking, it has never been disputed that Sakharam Maharaj constructed a temple in the year 1817 at Amalner and installed the aforesaid deity according to religious rites. He also acquired certain properties and the said temple with the properties constituted Shri. Vithal Rukhamai Sansthan of Amalner. The sansthan had movable property of the value of Rs. 19,164 and immovable properties of the value of Rs. 1,06,000 and the average gross annual income as well as the average annual expenditure was Rs. 11,000.

3. After the passing of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 (No. 29 of 1950) (briefly the Act) an application under Section 18 of that Act was filed by three persons Bhaskarrao Chimanrao Deshmukh, Ramrao Sahebrao Deshmukh and Ramkrishna Tryambak Deshpande as constituted attorneys of Vasudeobuwa who was described in the application as the owner of the property. The word Buwa means saint. The application was made on May 29, 1952, to the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Poona, under protest and without prejudice to the claim made therein that the Sansthan was not a public trust. In view of the penal provision under Section 66 of the Act in the case of non-compliance with Section 18 (1) of the Act the said application was made ex abundanti cautela. The Assistant Charity Commissioner after requisite notice made an enquiry into the matter in accordance with the provisions of the Act. On behalf of the applicants representing the Sansthan evidence of the attorney Ramkrishna Deshpande was recorded and he was cross-examined by the assessors as well as by the Assistant Charity Commissioner. Some documents were also produced on behalf of the Sansthan. Three witnesses were 873 examined on behalf of the Assistant Charity Commissioner and were accorded an opportunity to the applicants pleader for cross-examination. At the close of the enquiry the Assistant Charity Commissioner by his order of August 26, 1956, held the Sansthan to be a public trust and ordered its registration as a public trust under the Act.

4. The applicants thereupon filed an appeal under Section 70 of the Act before the Charity Commissioner, Bombay, who by his order of August 31, 1957, affirmed the decision of the Assistant Charity Commissioner.

5. That led to an application under Section 72 of the Act to the District Judge of west Khandesh at Dhulia which was duly filed on behalf of Purshottambuwa who meanwhile succeeded Guru Vasudeobuwa as owner of the Sansthan. The learned District Judge reversed the decision of the Charity Commissioner by his order of October, 16, 1959, and declared the Sansthan to be a private property and not a public trust.

6. The Charity Commissioner then appealed under Section 72(4) of the Act to the High Court of Bombay. The High Court by its order of 19/20th December, 1962, set aside the order of the District Judge and held the Sansthan to be a public trust under the Act and restored the order of the Charity Commissioner. Hence this appeal by special leave which was obtained on March 29, 1968, after condonation of delay in the peculiar circumstances of the case arising out of revocation by the High Court of its earlier certificate in favour of the appellant on account of default of deposit of security.

7. As noted earlier there was both Oral and documentary evidence adduced in this case. The learned District Judge relied mostly on the documentary evidence for his conclusion in favour of the appellant. The High Court took note of both oral as well as documentary evidence. The High Court particularly relied

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1976 Supreme(SC) 67

What is the classification of Shri. Vithal Rukhamai Sansthan at Amalner as private Devasthan or public religious trust?

What are the criteria and documentary evidence used to determine whether a temple endowment is private or public under the Bombay Public Trusts Act?

Cases Referred (6)