Rajagopalan, J.—In each of these cases the village which was admittedly an inam estate, was taken over by the Government under the provisions of the Abolition Act (Madras Act XXVI of 1948). An advance compensation for each such estate was deposited with the Tribunal. It was common ground that in each case the grant of the inam was to provide for the performance of specified services in the Sri Meenakshi Sundareswarar temple, Madurai, in one set of cases, and in the Kallalagar temple, in the other set of cases. The concerned Devasthanam claimed in each case that the entire amount of the advance compensation should be paid to it. The service-holders, who are the respondents before us on the other hand claimed that the amounts were payable to them as they alone were the principal landholders of the respective estates within the meaning of section 2 (12) of Act (XXVI of 1948). That the service-holders were in exclusive possession of their respective estates till they vested in the Government on the notified dates under section 3 of the Act was not in dispute. The Tribunal by a majority upheld the claim of the service-holders and dismissed the claims preferred by the Devasthanam under s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document