Chidambara Pillai vs Tiruvengadathiengar

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1887 Supreme(Mad) 4

Chidambara Pillai – Appellant
Versus
Tiruvengadathiengar – Respondent

JUDGMENT

1. The appellants, defendants, are the cultivating ryots of Periyakurvadi, a village in the District of Tanjore, and the respondents, plaintiffs, are trustees of Rajagopalaswamis temple at Mannargudi in the same District. It is admitted that the miras of the village is in the name of the temple and that the annual payment made by the appellants to the respondents is made both on account of the melvaram (Government share of the produce) and of mirasvaram (proprietors share of the produce). The village in suit is not then of the class of villages in which the temple endowment is limited, to the melvaram right. It is also not disputed that Periyakuruvadi is a taraf or assessed village and that, although no assessment is now paid, it is be cause of the recent assignment of the revenue due on the village in lieu of the annual money allowance paid by Government to the temple. It is clear, therefore, that the village was not one originally granted as inam for the support of the temple. We must take it then to, be an ordinary taraf or assessed village registered in the Collectors books in the name of the temple as its proprietor or mirasidar.

2. The appellants case was the temple wa