The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of historical documents and the conduct of the parties to determine ownership of temple lands and the removal of the trustee.

Ramesam, J.

1. These appeals arise out of a suit for a scheme and consequential reliefs under Section 69, Madras Act 1 of 1925 (The Religious Endowments Act) in respect of the endowments of a temple dedicated to Sri Varadaraja Perumal Swami in the village of Mullipallam, Nilakottai Taluk, Madura District. The plaintiffs case is that the lands which were constituted as an endowment were originally granted as an inam by the ancient Carnatic rulers of the country to the diety. The defendants belong to the family of the archakas of the temple. They pleaded that the archakas were in occupation of the lands from time out of memory. They also, say that they bona fide believe that the grant of the inam was to the service holder burdened with the obligation of the service of doing puja and putting light in the nights, and the allegation in the plaint that the inam was an inam to the deity was denied. Issue 5 in the case is whether the grant was to the temple itself or to the archaka burdened with service to the idol and Issue 4 is whether the plaint lands themselves constitute the inam or only the teerva thereof (the word "teerva" being used synonymous with assessment). The District Judge found that the grant was to the temple itself and not to the archaka and that the lands themselves constituted the inam. He gave a decree removing defendant 1 from the position of the trustee and he left it to the Religious Endowments Board to frame a scheme and appoint a fresh trustee. Meanwhile he directed that the receiver appointed by the Court should continue in possession. Both the parties appeal. The defendants are agreed that defendant 1 is the only person who was doing the work of the do facto trustee, that is, that he only was managing the temple and that the other defendants had nothing to do with the management of the temple.

2. The first question that arises in the case is the subject of Issue

5. The earliest document we have is Ex 7 being an extract from the jamabandi chitta of the village of Mullipallam for fasli 1210. It refers to Devadayam Sudha inam, and lower down refers to "Perumal" temple sudha inam". The next document we have is Ex. A (same as Ex. 7-A) an extract from the inam jamabandi account for fasli 1212 (that is the year 1802-1803). The document begins by referring to Devadayam inam. Then the heading of Col. 3 is given as Perumalkoil inam. As pointed out by me in Tripura Sundaramma v. Secretary of State A.I.R. 1928 Mad. 282 the word devadayam" itself may not be conclusive but the use of the word "Perumalkovil inam" tends to show that the inam was regarded as inam belonging to the temple. Davaraja Battar the ancestor of the defendants living at the time, was shown as cultivator. He was not mentioned even as the archaka of the temple. For fasli 1215 we have got Ex. 7-B which refers to Perumal inam cultivated by Devaraja Avyangar. The next document we have got is Ex. B-l the inam statement and Ex. B the inam register. In Col. 2 of the inam register the inam was described as "devadayam." I have already observed this may not be conclusive but in the inam statement in Cols. 4 and 5 also the word devadayarn" is mentioned under the headings "relationship between the original grantee of sannad and the person in enjoyment at present" and particulars of family." Though the use of word "devadayam" in Col. 2 of the register may not signify very much it seems to me that the use of word in Cols. 4 and 5 of the inam statement is unusual and goes to some extent against the contentions of the appellants (by which term I will throughout refer to the appellants in A.S. No. 233). In Col. 1 of the inam statement the entry is:

Entered in fasli 1212 Devaraja Ayyangar, Varadarajaperumal maniam, enjoyment at present by Lakshmana Ayyangar archaka performing puja to the said Swami, the heading being "name of Inamdar entered in dowl and the name of the per-son enjoying at present." The reference is obviously to Ex. A, and while Devaraja Ayyangars