Back
1961 Supreme(AP) 195
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : M.SESHACHALAPATI
Byreddi Narasi Reddi - Appellant
Versus
Thamballa Balamma - Respondent
Decided On : 11-14-61
A grant of land to a named individual burdened with an obligation of rendering service to a temple may be construed as a complete dedication to the temple if the grant is made to the individual in the capacity of a manager or servant of the temple, if there is no evidence that a substantial portion of the income of the property is meant for the beneficial enjoyment of the individual, and if the donor intended to apply the entire property for the benefit of the idol.
Headnote:
HINDU LAW - RELIGIOUS ENDOWMENTS - DEDICATION OF PROPERTY - COMPLETE OR PARTIAL - GRANT OF LAND TO NAMED INDIVIDUAL BURDENED WITH OBLIGATION OF RENDERING SERVICE - INTERPRETATION OF INSTRUMENT - PRINCIPLES.
Fact of the Case:
A suit was filed for a declaration of title to certain items of property, including Item 1, which was claimed by the plaintiff as being gifted to the Archakas of certain temples, while the defendant, the trustee of the temples, claimed that Item 1 was dedicated to the deity and not to the Archakas.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the property covered by Ex. A-3 was gifted by the donor to the temples, and not to Sankarayya personally subject to an obligation on his part to render service in the temples.
Issues: Whether the grant of land under Ex. A-3 was a complete dedication in favor of the temples, or a grant to a named individual burdened with an obligation of rendering service.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principles laid down in Dasaratha rami Reddi v. Subba Rao, 1957 SCJ 835 at p. 838 : (AIR 1957 SC 797 at p. 800), and Bala Tripura Sundaramma v. Secy. of State AIR 1928 Mad 282, to interpret the instrument Ex. A-3. The court held that the grant was made to Sankarayya in the capacity of a manager of the temples, that there was no evidence that a substantial portion of the income of the property was meant for the beneficial enjoyment of Sankarayya as remuneration for his service, and that the donor intended to apply the entire property for the benefit of the idol. Therefore, the court concluded that the grant was a complete dedication to the temple.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the decision of the learned District Judge was set aside, and the judgment and decree of the District Munsif were restored.
( 1 ) THIS Second Appeal arises out of O. S. No. 220 of 1954, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Proddatur, instituted by the Respondent in this appeal, Thamballa Balamma. That suit was filed under the following circumstances. By an order dated 5-4-52, the Hindu Religious Endowments Department, appointed the defendant in the present suit Byreddi Narasi Reddy, as trustee of the temples of Eswara Parvathi Devathalu and Navagraha Devathalu in Peddamudiam of Jammalamadugu Taluk. The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments by his memorandum dated 24-6-1954, directed the trustee Narasi Reddi to lease out the temple lands in public auction. The trustee purported to do so. Thereupon, the respondent Thamballa Balamma filed O. S. No. 220 of 1353 for a declaration of her title to items 1 to 8 of the plain) schedule, and for an injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with her possession. According to her items 1 to 4 were gifted by B. C. Naramma and others to the Archakas in the suit temples, that the Archakas were enjoying the properties and rendering service, that her husband Sankaraiah, who died about 20 years ago, was the last holder of the office, that after his death she was getting the services performed through her son-in-law and that, therefore, she was entitled to the possession of those Items. She claimed items 5 and 6 on the foot of adverse possession. items 7 and 8 were claimed by her as being the personal properties of her husband Shankaraiah, and that the trustee of the temple has, in any case, no manner of right over them. The present appellant Byreddi Narasi Reddi contested the suit by contending that items 1 to 4 were lands granted to the deity and not to the Archakas, that the plaintiffs husband was never a hereditary Archaka, that items 5 and 8 were also Devadayam lands, and that on 28-6-1954, be notified that the lease-hold rights would be sold in a public auction, and that the present suit of the plaintiff was wholly without any merits.
( 2 ) THE learned District Munsif, after framing the appropriate issues and on a review of the evidence, oral and documentary, held that the plaintiff Thamballa Balamme was entitled to a declaration and injunction only with respect to items 7 and 8 and dismissed the suit with respect to the other items. In appeal by the plaintiff, the learned District Judge, Cuddapah, allowed the plaintiffs claim with respect to Item 1, while agreeing with the District Munsif that her claim with respect to items 2 to 6 must be rejected. The defendant-trustee of the temple has filed this Second Appeal, which is, therefore, confined to item 1 of the plaint schedule only.
( 3 ) ITEM 1 of the plaint schedule is of an extant of 3. 31 cents and covered by a registered instrument of gift (Ex. A3 ). The instrument is a brief one, and may be extracted in full. It is in these terms: COPY OF DOCUMENT Ex. A-3 "17-7-1934 (Seventeenth day of July, Nineteen hundred and thirty four) Bhoodan deed executed by Chinnamma wife of Velapuram Buchireddy, resident of Peddamudiem village in the sub-District of Jammalamadugu, Kapu, cultivator, in favour of Sakarasayya, son of Thambalia Chinna Nagayya, resident of Paluru village in the sub-district of Jammalamadugu, Cuddapah District Tapodara caste, living on Devata Inams and for the time being manager of both (a) Sri Parvathi Devi Idol installed by me (Prathishta) in Mukkanti Eswara temple situate near Mukagulla which is to the north of Peddamudiem village in Jammalamudugu sub-district, Cuddapah district, and (b) Sri Sivalingaswamy ldol trict, Cuddapah district, and (b) Sri Sivalingaswamy ldol which I brought from Kasi and installed in the other temple which I got constructed in the same compound of the abovesaid temple in the same village. In the year 1894 for performing nitya sandhya deeparadhana and for nivadyam on every Monday in the above-said Parvathi, Sivilingaswamy temples, I had given to your brother Sarabhayya for o
