Essentialities for a temple.

This appeal is directed against the Decree and Judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Vellore, in O.S. No. 69 of 1954.

It is a statutory suit filed under section 62 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the persons aggrieved who consist of Sri Ramanasramam by its Secretary G. Sambasiva Rao, T. N. Venkaraman, A.W. Chadwick, S. S. Cohen, Framji Dorabji, A. Devaraja Mudaliar and C. Somasundaram Pillai. The defendant is the Commissioner for Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, Madras. The question for consideration is whether the component part of Sri Ramanasramam, by name Sri Mathru-bootheswara Swami Temple, an institution registered under the Societies Registration Act, (Exhibit A-23, dated nth September, 1950), is a temple as contemplated by section 6 (17) of the Act, as has been held by the learned Subordinate Judge or a public religious trust as has been contended by the plaintiffs, with the following objects viz., to carry out the provisions in the Will of Sri Bhagwan, to administer Sri Ramanasramam, Sri Mathrubootheswara Swami temple, the Samadhi of Sri Bhagwan Ramana Maharishi with the properties and assets attached thereto and for propagating the sayings of the Bhagwan.

Section 6 (17) of the Act defines a temple as,

“a place, by whatever designation known, used as a place of public religious worship, and dedicated to, or for the benefit of or use as of right by, the Hindu Community or any section thereof, as a place of public religious worship.”

In regard to what constitutes a public religious trust in Hindu Law, we have three authoritative works of Pandit Pran Nath Saraswati’s Hindu Law of Endowments, Tagore Law Lectures, (1892), P.R. Ganapathi Ayyar’s Hindu and Moham-madan Endowments, Second Edition (1918) and B. K. Mukherjea’s (late Chief Justice of India) Hindu Law of Religious and Charitable Trust, Tagore Law Lectures (1952) and the following information can be gathered therefrom.

In the Hindu system there is no line of demarcation between religion and charity. On the other hand, charity is regarded as part of religion. This is because the Hindu Religion recognises the existence of a life after death, and it believes in the Law of Karma according to which the good or bad deeds of a man produce corresponding results in the life to come. Therefore, all the Hindu sages concur in holding that charitable gifts are pious acts par excellence which bring appropriate rewards to the donor.

Hindu religious and charitable acts have been from the earliest time classified under two heads, viz., istha and purtta. The two words are often used conjointly and they are as old as the Rig Veda. The compound word istha-purtta has been retained in the writings of all Brahminical sages and commentators down to modern days, and although the connotation of these two expressions was extended to some extent in course of time, the fundamental ideas involved in them remain practically the same. By istha is meant Vedic sacrifices, and rites and gifts in connection with the same; purtta on the other hand means and signifies other pious and charitable acts which are unconnected with any srauta or Vedic sacrifice. The meaning of those two expressions has been discussed elaborately by Pandit Pran Nath Saraswati, in his Tagore Law Lectures on the Hindu Law of Endowments.

Following a text of Sankha quoted by Hemadri, Pandit Pran Nath Saraswati, makes the following enumeration of istha works, viz.,(i) Vedic sacrifices, etc., (2) gifts offered to priests at the same, (3) preserving the Vedas, (4) Religious austerity, (5) Rectitude, (6) Vaiswadev sacrifices and (7-) hospitality. The purtta works not only signified such works of public utility as excavation of tank, wells, etc., but included all acts which either conferred some kind of benefit on those who were in need of it, or were regarded as meritorious from the spiritual or religious point of view. From the numerous Smrit