Rajamannar, C.J.-The only question in this appeal against the judgment of Raghava Rao, J., in A.S. No. 128 of 1949 is whether the temple known as the Sree Subramaniaswami temple in the village of Vadamadurai in Tiruvallur Taluk in the district of Chinglept is a temple which falls within the definition of "temple" in section 9(12) of Madras Act (II of 1927.) That definition is as follows:-

"'Temple' means a place, by whatever designation known, used as a place of public religious worship and dedicated to, or for the benefit of, or used as of right by, the Hindu community or any section thereof, as a place of religious worship".

The question arose on account of the action taken by the Hindu Religious Endowments Board, Madras. The hereditary trustee of the temple filed a petition under section 84 (2) of the Act for a declaration that the said temple is a private temple not falling within the definition of "temple" in the Act. The learned District Judge of Chingleput held that the institution in question is a temple as defined in the Act and hence dismissed the petition. On appeal to this Court, Raghava Rao, J., reversed the decision of the learned District Judge and held that the insti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document