Judgment.- The plaintiffs in O.S. No. 78 of 1973 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Nagapattinam are the appellants. The plaintiffs have instituted the suit in their capacity as the hereditary trustees of what is known as the private family trust Sri Natarajaswamy Temple, Thillaivilagam. According to the allegations in the plaint seme years ago while digging the field of one S.N. Sambasiva Iyer his farm servant Vaithi Ambalagaran came across one Nataraja Vigraham and two Amman Vigrahams. The Government recognised the finder Vaithi Ambalagaran as the owner of the said Vigrahams under the Treasure Trove Act. Under Exhibit A-1, a document styled as a registered release deed, the said Sambasiva Iyer got the Vigrahams from the said Vaithi Ambalagaran. However, Sambasiva Iyer was not financially in a position to build a temple for installing the Vigrahams and making provisions for the daily pooja and neivedyam of the idols. He therefore gave the idols to one Chockalinga Chettiar, brother of Narayanan Chettiar great grandfather of the plaintiffs. The said brothers constructed a temple for the family business in the hands of the brothers prospered enormously, with the result that they were able to build a small temple at Thillivilagam and installed the idols therein. Subsequently they acquired land out of the money lending business for the unkeep and maintenance of the temple. Under Exhibit A-3 dated 17th February, 1908 they obtained a formal release in respect of the idols from the widow of. Sambasiva Iyer. Again on 8th November, 1922 nine more idols and two peedams were found in a field in Thillaivilagam and those idols were also entrusted to the custody of the plaintiffs’ ancestor Narayanan Chettiar who purchased the same for a sum of Rs. 460-12-0. One of the items so purchased included an Uthsava Vigraham of Sri Natarajaswami. Thereafter, the brothers Chockalinga Chettiar and Narayanan Chettiar spent about two lakhs of rupees and built a stone temple with prakarams and compound walls and performed kumbabishegam at a cost of Rs. 20,000 in 1922. Since then the temple has been in the management of the plaintiff’s family for four generations. About 30 acres of lands were purchased by the plaintiffs’ ancestor for the benefit of the family temple. The expenses of pooja and neivedyam for four kalams are being performed and met with from the income of the lands purchased by the plaintiffs’ family. No contribution or donation had ever been obtained from the public either for the building of the temple or for the Kumbabishegam or for the purchase of the lands for the temple. The Gurukkal, the cook, the Meikaval and piper were all appointed by the plaintiffs’ ancestors and by the plaintiffs and their salaries also paid by ancestors of the plaintiffs and by the plaintiffs. There is no Balipeedam or Dwajasthambam in the temple. There is no Uthsavams performed by the temple. In the whole year six abishegams are performed and the entire expenses are met by the plaintiffs’ family. Of the two brothers Chockalinga Chettiar died issueless. Narayanan Chettiar had two sons Meyappa and Annamalai. Narayanan Chettiar died in 1923. Meyappa Chettiar had no issues and his widow adopted one Kannappa Chettiar who also died issueless. Kannappa Chettiar had adopted the second plaintiff. The first plaintiff is the only son of Annamalai. The plaintiffs are the present hereditary. trustees of the suit private family temple.

2. The plaint further proceeds to state that the second defendant, Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, Nagapattinam, (second respondent) sent a notice to the first plaintiff on 27th May, 1969 calling upon the plaintiffs to explain certain matters in the audit reports from fasli 1374 to 1378. The first plaintiff sent an explanation in a letter to the second defendant on 28th June, 1969. Even before completing the enquiry, the second defendant sent a report to the first defendant and appointed an ex

Click Here to Read the rest of this document