Ismail, J.- These two appeals arise out of the judgment and decree of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode in O.S. No. 144 of 1964. The former appeal has been preferred by defendants 8 and 4 therein, while the latter appeal has been preferred by persons who were not parties to the proceedings, but who had obtained the permission of this Court to file an appeal against that judgment.

2. The controversy relates to a Mutt called Sri Thiruvalangadu Immudi Agora Dharma Sivachariar Ayira Vysia Mutt, situate at Nerinjipettai, Bhavani Taluk, Coimbatore District. The history of this suit has been elaborately set out in the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Erode, dated 24th December, 1958 in O.S. No. 155 of 1956 on his file. The plaintiffs and defendants 2 to 10 in the suit are the disciples of the said Mutt which is admittedly an ancient institution. The Deputy Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, settled a scheme for the administration of the Mutt in O.A. No. 351 of 1951. The matter was taken upon appeal to the Commissioner and then to the Subordinate Judge’s Court, Erode. Finally a scheme was settled by the Subordinate Judge’s Court, Erode, by judgment and decree, dated 24th December, 1958. Glauses 4 and 6 of this scheme relating to election and representation of the trustees are the important provisions as far as the present appeals are concerned. Clause 4 provided that the committee of trustees shall consist of 12 persons elected from among the disciples residing in the Districts of the Madras State, and of the trustees so elected, one each should represent those residing in each of the eleven districts, and the City of Madras as per Schedule A to the scheme. This clause further provided that should there be no representation’ from a particular district, the orders of the Commissioner under Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act should be taken as to-whether an additional trustee might be selected from another district within three months from the election of the other trustees. Clause 6 provided that the committee of trustees shall be elected at a General Body meeting of the disciples convened at Nerinjipet specially for this purpose and all the disciples shall be entitled to participate and vote at the election of trustees. Subsequent to the settlement of this scheme by the Subordinate Judge’s Court on 24th December, 1958, trustees were elected in accordance with the scheme and after the expiry of their term of five years, fresh trustees were to be elected on 25th December, 1964, as per the publication made by the managing trustee. Defendants 2 to 16 in the present suit filed an application, O.A. No. 2 of 1964 before the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, for modification of clause 6. The purport of the modification was that in stead of the entire body of disciples meeting at a particular place and electing all the 12 trustees, the disciples of the mutt residing in each district shall separately elect one trustee for the district. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, by his order, dated 11th August, 1964 in C.A. No. 2 of 1964 allowed this amendment. It is to set aside this order of the Commissioner that the present suit was instituted by four plaintiffs in a representative capacity representing all the disciples of the first defendant mutt. Their case, as put forward in the plaint, was that the order of the Commissioner was liable to be set aside on the ground that it was without jurisdiction and that it had been passed without giving notice to and without hearing all those disciples who were interested in the mutt. They also put forward the contention that the amendment prayed for and ordered by the Commissioner will have the effect of producing a spirit of parochialism in the administration of the mutt. However, defendants 2 to 16 in the suit contested this position and put forward the contention that the amendment was in the interest

Click Here to Read the rest of this document