Sri Vedaranyeswaraswami Devasthanam, Vedaranyam, by its Hereditary Trustee, Sri V. Kanagasabai Pandara Sannadhi by his Power-of-a Attorney Agent Sri V. K. Somasundara Pandara Sannadhi vs The State of Madras, represented by the Collector of Thanjavur, Thanjavur

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1962 Supreme(Mad) 376

M.ANANTANARAYANAN, S.RAMACHANDRA.IYER
Sri Vedaranyeswaraswami Devasthanam, Vedaranyam, by its Hereditary Trustee, Sri V. Kanagasabai Pandara Sannadhi by his Power-of-a Attorney Agent Sri V. K. Somasundara Pandara Sannadhi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Madras, represented by the Collector of Thanjavur, Thanjavur – Respondent

Advocates:
V. Vedantachari and T. M. Chinnayya Pillai, for Petitioner in W.P. No. 943 of 1959 and W.P. Nos. 287 and 288 of 1960.
V. Vedantachari, for Petitioners in W.P. Nos. 135 and 547 to 581 and 770 and 1275 to 1284 of 1960.
K. Parasaran, for Petitioner in W.P. Nos. 179 and 272 of 1960.
N. Appu Rao, for Petitioned in W.P. Nos. 189 and 864 of 1960.
K. S. Naidu and R. Vijayan, for Petitioner in W.P. Nos. 286 of 1960 etc., etc.
U. Somasundaram, for Petitioners in W.P. Nos. 296 etc., etc., or 1960.
G. Ramaswami and S. M. Subramaniam, for Petitioner in W.P. No. 344 of 1960.
S. Bhaskaran, for Petitioner in W.P. No. 427 of 1960.
T. M. Chinnayya Pillai and T. S. Palanisivagurunathan, for Petitioners in W.P. Nos. 459 etc., etc. of 1961.
R. G. Rajan, for Petitioner in W.P. Nos. 791 and 792 of 1960.
A. Sundaram Ayyar and T. R. Mani, for Petitioner in W.P. No. 915 of 1960.
P. Veeraraghavan, for Petitioner in W.P. No. 1007 of 1960.
V. Ratnam, for Petitioner in W.P. No. 1050 of 1960.
T. V. Balakrishnan and N. Vanchinathan, for Petitioner in W.P. No. 354 of 1961.
V. Vedantachari and R. K. Tatachari, for Petitioner in W.P. No. 508 of 1961.
R. Gopalaswami Iyengar, for Petitioner in W.P. Nos. 702, etc., etc., of 1961.
T. R. Ramachandran, for Petitioner in W.P. Nos. 1272 and 1273 of 1061.
The Advocate-General V. K. Thiauvenkatachari and the Additional Government Pleader, on behalf of Respondent in W.P. No. 943 of 1959.
The Additional Government Pleader, on behalf of Respondents in all the Petitions.

Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.-

This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution raises a question as to the validity of the Madras Inams Assessment Act 1956 (XL of 1956) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) with a view to quash a Notification made thereunder.

The petitioner, Sri Vedaranyeswaraswami Devasthanam is being maintained with the income from, and is the grantee, of, several inams which are spread over in about twenty-three villages in the Tanjore District. One such inam is an extent of 4.6 acres 43 cents in the Village of Pannal in Thiruthuraipoondi Taluk. This is a minor inam where both the warams in the land are owned by the petitioner subject to an annual payment of Rs. 15.75np by way of jodi or cesses to the Government. The title deed issued in favour of the Manager of the Devasthanam confirms the inam for the support of the temple, “tax tree to be held without interference so long as the conditions of the grant are duly fulfilled”. The lands covered by the inam are in the possession of tenants, the rent paid by them being Rs. 103.83np. per year. Out of this sum the petitioner claims that Rs. 17.50 has to be spent away as expenditure for collection, the net income fro

Click Here to Read the rest of this document