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

1931 Supreme(SC) 48

Privy Council At Madras
Sir Dinshah Mulla, Sir George Lowndes, Macmillan, Thankerton , Justice Lord Atkinson, JJ.
Tirupparankundaram etc., Madura Devasthanams -Appellant
Versus
Alikhan Sahib and others -Resopndent
Privy Council Appeal No. 5 of 1930
Decided On : 12-05-1931

Advocates Appeared:
B. Dube, L.De. Gruyther , K.V.L. Narasimham, W.H. Upjohn

Sir George Lowndes.—

Their Lordships have to determine in this appeal the ownership of a barren hill in the Madura District of Madras. The claimants before the Board are the Government represented by the Secretary of State for India in Council, and the Tirupparankundram Temple. The Mahomedan community, who have a mosque on the highest point of the hill, were parties to the proceedings in the Indian Courts, but they have not been represented on the present appeal. The Madura Taluk Board was also a party to the suit but has not appeared on the appeal.

In the trial Court, the temple, represented by its manager, was the plaintiff. He claimed the whole hill, with the exception of certain cultivated and assessed lands and the site of the mosque, as temple property. The Mahomedan defendants asserted their ownership of the particular eminence upon which the mosque stands, and of a portion of the main hill known as the Nellitope. The Secretary of State, who will be referred to as the respondent, claimed to be the owner of all the unoccupied portions of the hill as Government poramboke or waste appertaining to the village of Tirupparankundram, which is admittedly Government property.

The suit was tried by the Subordinate Judge of Madura. He decided against the Government claim and in favour of the temple, except in respect of the Nellitope, and the actual site of the mosque with its flagstaff and flight of steps leading up to it, which he held to be the property of the Mahomedan defendants. The decree of the Subordinate Judge was dated 25th August 1923.

The Government were apparently content with this decision. The unoccupied portions of the hill were probably of little value to them, and neither the Secretary of State nor the temple manager appealed. The Mahomedans were dissatisfied and appealed, but as their only grievance was against the temple, they did not make the Secretary of State a party. The result, their Lordships think, must have been unexpected.

The greater part of three years elapsed before the appeal came on for hearing. When it did, the learned Judges of the High Court thought that the Government ought to be represented before them. A notice was issued, and on 20th April 1926, the Secretary of State put in cross-objections contesting the decision of the Subordinate Judge upon every head of his judgment. The appeal was taken up again on 4th May 1926, and was somewhat summarily dealt with. The learned Judges found that the ownership of the hill belonged to the Government; they dismissed the appeal by the Mahomedans allowed the cross-appeal of the Secretary of State, and dismissed the suit. They agreed that both the Hindus and the Mahomedans had established certain rights over the hill, but thought it unnecessary to decide what they were. This, in some ways strange, conclusion was reached in a single days' hearing, though before the Subordinate Judge the trial had occupied the Court far more than 30 days, and the appeal before their Lordships has necessitated an unusually protracted hearing.

The Tirupparankundarm Temple is one of the famous rock temples of Southern India. It is situated at the base of a hill some 500 feet high; and is dedicated to Subramanya, the son of Siva. The inner shrine of the temple is hewn out of the hill and in it, carved in the rock itself, is the image of the deity. Around the base of the hill is a pilgrims' way, nearly two miles in extent. This is said to be essential to the worship of the devotees, who perform the ceremony of 'pradakshinam' by going round the image of the deity with the right shoulder continuously presented to him. As the image in the temple is an actual part of the hill, it is obvious that the performance of this rite necessitates the perambulation of the hill itself. This way which is also used for processions of the temple car on ceremonial occasions is known as the 'ghiri veedhi' and it is claimed as the property of the temple. It is referred to in numerous documents, dating back




























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