Trust proper held secular in character.

N.Kannadasan, J.

The above appeal is filed as against the order dated 31.12.2003 in Application No.5338 of 2000 in C.S.No.703 of 1999 passed by the learned single Judge.

2. The respondents herein have filed C.S.No.703 of 1999 under Section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code seeking permission to dispose of the suit schedule mentioned property by entering into joint a development agreement and pay off the liabilities of the trust. The suit is filed contending that the subject matter of the suit absolutely vests with the trust, and the respondents, who are the trustees, are entitled to deal with and dispose of the same in the best interest of the trust. It is further contended therein that the trust property is secular in character, and the same can be used for secular purposes, and it is outside the purview of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act (hereinafter called as the Act). It is further contended that the respondents/plaintiffs have raised a dispute under Section 63(f) of the H.R. & C.E. to declare the property dedicated under the deed of settlement as a secular property, and the Joint Commissioner in O.A.No.3 of 1996, by order dated 15.11.1998, held that the property dedicated under the deed of settlement is for secular purposes which squarely comes under the secular character and as such, the temple cannot have any objection for the grant of permission. The learned single Judge of this Court by considering the evidence available on record, by order dated 24.4.2000 granted permission to the respondents/plaintiffs to dispose of the property.

3. The appellant herein filed application No.5338 of 2000 to set aside the order made in C.S.703 of 1999 dated 24.4.2000 contending that the permission granted is not in accordance with law. The learned Judge, by order dated 31.12.2003, dismissed the said application against which the above appeal is filed.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the property in question cannot be termed as 'secular' in character and the order dated 15.11.1998, passed by the Joint Commissioner, H.R.&C.E. Department under Section 63 of the Act, has not become final. The learned counsel further contended that the said order is under challenge by way of an appeal filed under Section 101 of the Act by the temple authority as well as an another worshipper in A.P.No.30 of 1999 and the same is pending. Even the recitals of the trust deed do not disclose that the property in question is secular in nature, as held by the learned Judge and accordingly the application has to be allowed.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents contended that the intention of the applicant/appellant herein is not bona fide one and when the permission was sought for to dispose of the property, neither the worshipper nor the temple authority have resisted the said application. In fact, a Civil Suit was filed in O.S.No.2972 of 2000 on the file of the City Civil Court, Madras, seeking for a permanent injunction and when an Interlocutory Application was filed in I.A.No.7826 of 2000, the matter was argued at length and the order passed by this Court on 24.4.2000 was marked as document No.1 and when the said application came to be dismissed on 7.9.2000, the appellant herein by engaging the very same counsel, who represented the plaintiff in the said suit, has filed the present application and the copy of which was sought to be served upon the respondents and several facts have been suppressed. The learned counsel for the respondents further contended that initially another suit was filed in O.S.No.5262 of 1994 by Archakas who were in occupation of the property and at the instance of the respondents, the said suit came to be withdrawn. It is also contended that inasmuch as the applicant has approached the Commissioner, H.R. & C.E. Department under Section 101 of the Act, the applicant cannot pursue a parallel remedy by way of filing the above application, unless and until the order