JUDGMENT.- The plaintiff is the appellart. The suit was filed for recovery of the suit properties from defendants 6 to 14. One Subbaraya Iyer purchased originally a small bit of land in Raghunathapuram, which is a hamlet of Sholapuram within the Sub-Registration District of Tiruvidaimaruthur, Kumbakonam taluk, and with his own money put up a tiled building and planted cocoanut trees. In the building he installed “Sri Ramachandramurthy” and consecrated the same and was performing daily pooja, and neivedyam and was also conducting festivals on important occasions. Later on, by a deed of endowment dated 4th September, 1904 he constituted this into a trust and endowed also other properties. He called the trust property as a public charitable trust. The Hindu community of the village were worshipping in the madam, doing bajanai and holding festivals on important occasions. The trust deed provided also for the management of the trust properties and the madam. The founder constituted himself as the first trustee and further provided that after his death the eldest of his brothers should become a trustee and thereafter the eldest sons of his brothers should succeed and manage the properties as sole trustees. In the event of a failure to assume the trusteeship by any persons referred to above or on their acting adversely to the trust, the deed further provided that it would be open to anybody who is interested in the trust or any worshipper to take steps in a Court of law to either have the trustees removed or seek the appointment of a trustee and ask for such other relief, as might be necessary. It appears that there were also certain buildings which were used as shops. The original founder died in the year 1940 and he was succeeded by one of his brothers by name C.V. Panchapagesa Iyer. He was managing the properties as a trustee, conducting the festivals and performing the daily pooja, for about six or seven years. The first defendant is the son of the said Panchapagesa Iyer. Panchapagesa Iyer is now reported to be dead. But, even during his lifetime, he began to alienate the endowed properties in favour of defendants 6 to 9. Under Exhibit B-12, dated 15th August, 1957, Panchapagesa Iyer and his son (the first defendant) sold an extent of 2o cents, which included the madam proper, to the 6th defendant. The same two vendors executed another sale deed on 30th January, 1957 in favour of the 9th defendant, conveying another extent of 2o cents. With the consideration, it appears that they purchased a building in a nearby village called Kumbakonam, another property, removed the Sri Rama Pattabhisheka picture which was consecrated in the suit property and installed the same in the property newly purchased at Kumbakonam. The plaintiff, who is the grandson of the original founder, has filed this suit for 3 declaration that the alienations are not binding on the trust and for recovery of possession of the suit properties.

2. The main defence was that Raghunathapuram, which is part of Shclapuram village, had subsequent to the constitution of the trust and the consecration of the madam, become predominantly a Muslim locality, that the then trustee, Panchapagesa Iyer and the first defendant, considered it not congenial to have the madam or the performance of the festivals in that area and that therefore, having the interest of the temple as the primary consideration, sold the properties to the defendants and constituted another madam in Kumbakonam village. The defendarts also raised the plea that the plaintiff has no lous standi to file this suit since he is not either 2 trustee or a personer titled to become a trustee and that therefore he could not maintain the suit. Incidentally, a question was also raised as to whether the suit properties are public trust.

3. Both the Courts below, on a consideration of the document and the recitals therein, came to the conclusion that it is a public religious and charitable trust. That the trust is of a public

Click Here to Read the rest of this document