Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
R.M. Sundaram @ Meenakshisundaram & Another
Versus
Sri Kayarohanasamy and Neeladhakshiamman Temple & Another
S.A. Nos.1522 of 1993 and 829 of 2000
Decided On : 01-06-2008
Suit jewels were gifted by Muthuthandapani Chettiar's ancestors for adorning the processional deity Neelayathakshi Amman during Adipooram Festival. Suit jewels belong to the temple. Defendant cannot claim any right over the kudavarai and the suit jewels. Defendant is not cooperating with the temple authorities in opening the kudavarai and taking the jewels for adorning the processional deity during Adipooram Festival. Temple is entitled for injunction restraining the Defendant from removing the suit jewels in any manner and interfering with the custody and possession of the jewels by the temple.
Fact of the Case:
Suit jewels were gifted by Muthuthandapani Chettiar's ancestors for adorning the processional deity Neelayathakshi Amman during Adipooram Festival. Defendant claims to be the adopted son of Muthuthandapani Chettiar and his wife Thangammal. Defendant sent notice to the temple cancelling permission to use kudavarai and to hand over possession of kudavarai to the Defendant. Temple filed suit O.S.No.56/1996 for a declaration that 26 items of jewels belonged to the temple. Temple also prayed for Permanent Injunction restraining the Defendant from removing the suit jewels in any manner and interfering with the custody and possession of the jewels by the temple. Defendant filed suit O.S.No.156/1986 to direct the temple to discharge the undertaking under Ex.A-2 letter and also seeking exclusive possession of the temple Kudavarai.
Finding of the Court:
Suit jewels were gifted by Muthuthandapani Chettiar's ancestors for adorning the processional deity Neelayathakshi Amman during Adipooram Festival. Suit jewels belong to the temple. Defendant cannot claim any right over the kudavarai and the suit jewels. Defendant is not cooperating with the temple authorities in opening the kudavarai and taking the jewels for adorning the processional deity during Adipooram Festival. Temple is entitled for injunction restraining the Defendant from removing the suit jewels in any manner and interfering with the custody and possession of the jewels by the temple.
Issues: Whether the Courts below are right in holding that the suit is barred under Section 108 and 116 of H.R & CE Act? Whether the Courts below are right in accepting the contention of the Defendant as it is when they are estopped from raising contrary averment from their statement between the parties in the earlier suit i.e., in Ex.A-15? Whether the Courts below are right in interpreting Ex.A-15, in which the temple had admitted the contents of the plaintiff in the present suit ? Whether the Courts below are right in holding that Sec.80 of CPC notice was not given, when the same was given?
Ratio Decidendi: The suit jewels were gifted by Muthuthandapani Chettiar's ancestors for adorning the processional deity Neelayathakshi Amman during Adipooram Festival. The suit jewels belong to the temple. The Defendant cannot claim any right over the kudavarai and the suit jewels. The Defendant is not cooperating with the temple authorities in opening the kudavarai and taking the jewels for adorning the processional deity during Adipooram Festival. The temple is entitled for injunction restraining the Defendant from removing the suit jewels in any manner and interfering with the custody and possession of the jewels by the temple.
Final Decision: S.A.No.829/2000: Judgment and Decree of the lower Appellate Court in A.S.No.6/1999 is set aside and this appeal is allowed. The relief of declaration granted by the trial Court in O.S.No.50/1996 is confirmed. In O.S.No.56/1996, Permanent injunction is also granted as prayed for by the temple; The Defendant is directed to hand over the keys in his possession of the Kudavarai and the iron safe where the suit jewels are kept, to the Joint Commissioner - H.R.&C.E., Tanjore, within a period of eight weeks from the date of this Judgment; Joint Commissioner, H.R.&C.E. Tanjore shall hold the keys of Kudavarai and iron safe where suit jewels are kept. During Adipooram Festival, Executive Officer of plaintiff Temple shall inform the Joint Commissioner, H.R.&C.E., Tanjore, the date of festival and the date on which the Kudavarai is to be opened. Such communication has to be sent to the Joint Commissioner I, Tanjore two weeks in advance. Joint Commissioner, H.R.&C.E., Tanjore shall make himself available at the required time for opening the Kudavarai and iron safe and the Joint Commissioner, H.R.&C.E., Tanjore shall open the Kudavarai and iron safe along with the temple authorities and hand over the suit jewels, after verification by an approved appraiser, prepare a list and receive with due acknowledgment. Immediately after the Adipooram Festival is over, the Executive Officer shall hand over the jewels to the Joint Commissioner, Tanjore. At the time of taking back the jewels, Joint Commissioner - Tanjore shall again verify the jewels with the help of an appraiser and keep it back in the iron safe, along with the Appraiser Certificate. Subject to the above directions, Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Tanjore shall keep the keys of Kudavarai and iron safe in safe custody; Joint Commissioner, HRCE, Tanjore, shall also cooperate with the temple authorities for opening the Kudavarai and iron safe for the purpose of any verification. It is further directed that as and when the jewels are taken out, the jewels shall be verified with the help of an approved appraiser and list shall be prepared and the jewels shall be kept back only after verification from the approved appraiser. S.A.No.1522/1993: The concurrent findings of the Courts below made in A.S.No.354/1992 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Nagapattinam, [confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 211. 1990 made in O.S.No.156/1986 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Nagapattinam], is confirmed and this second appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Challenge in the S.A.No.1522/1993 is the concurrent findings of Courts below dismissing the suit for relief of mandatory injunction directing the Neelayathakshi Amman Temple to discharge the undertaking under Ex.A-2 letter and also seeking exclusive possession of the temple Kudavarai. Unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant.
2. In S.A.No.829/2000, challenge is to the appeal of the Judgment of the lower Appellate Court in A.S.No.6/1999 reversing the Judgment of the trial Court in O.S.No.56/1996 and thereby dismissing temples suit for declaration and Permanent Injunction.
3. Since in both the second appeals common substantial question of law arise for consideration, both the second appeals shall stand disposed of by this common Judgment. For convenience, parties are referred as per their array in O.S.No.56/1996 suit filed by the temple.
4. Briefly stated background facts which led to the filing of the appeals are as follows:-
Suit jewels – 26 items of jewels [some imbedded with diamonds and precious stones] worth more than Rupees One crore were gifted by Muthuthandapani Chettiars ancestors for the specific purpose of adorning the deity Sri Neelayathakshi Amman during Adipooram Festival celebrated by the temple by taking out around four car streets of the temple. The jewels are kept in kudavarai, which is under lock and key. There are two set of keys and one set of key is with the temple authorities and another set with the donors family.
5. During the period of Muthuthandapani Chettiar, he was having the custody of the keys and after his demise, his widow, Thangammal, was having the custody of the keys. The Defendant claims to be the adopted son of Muthuthandapani Chettiar and his wife Thangammal.
6. Case of the Defendant is that the temple has earlier filed suit claiming right over the jewels in O.S.No.99/1981 and the said suit was dismissed. Appeal preferred by the temple in A.S.No.113/82 was also dismissed. According to the Defendant, Muthuthandapani Chettiar had permitted the temple to keep temple jewels when Treasury Room was under repair and thereafter, temple authorities had not removed the temple jewels from Kudavarai. The Defendant has sent notice to the temple cancelling permission to use kudavarai and to hand over possession of kudavarai to the Defendant. Since the plaintiff temple has not complied with the same, Defendant has filed suit O.S.No.156/1986 to direct the temple to discharge the alleged liability or undertaking given under Ex.A-2 letter allegedly written by previous Executive Officer and also seeking for exclusive possession of the temple Kudavarai.
7. Temple defended the suit contending that Ex.A-2 letter was not an undertaking but was only a request to Muthuthandapani Chettiar to bring one set of keys which was in his custody at that time for opening the doors of the temple kudavarai. According to the temple, there was no undertaking and assuming without admitting even if it was so, Ex.A-2 was not acted upon. The temple also contended that the Defendants suit is barred by the provisions of HR & CE Act under Secs.108 and 116 and therefore, the suit is not maintainable. The temple also raised the plea of limitation under Art.113 of Limitation Act and for want of notice under Section 80 CPC.
8. On the above pleadings trial Court framed necessary issues. The trial Court found that Ex.A-2 was not acted upon and took the view that the Defendant finding that the temple suit O.S.No.99/1981 was dismissed, hit upon a plan to grab the temple jewels for himself and to claim exclusive possession of the temple kudavarai so that he can remove the temple jewels and misappropriate the same for his benefit. The trial Court pointed out that O.S.No.99/1981 was filed by the temple only to take an inventory of Amman jewels and held that the dismissal of the suit O.S.No.99/1981 would not confer any right upon the Defendant.
9. Confirming the findings of the trial Court, the appeal preferred by the Defendant in A.S.N
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
