Non-application of the principles of res judicata.

The defendant/ Commissioner, H.R. & C.E. Department, in O.S.No.71 of 1981 is the appellant in the second appeal.

2. The suit was filed by the respondents herein, as representatives of Sengunthar Mudaliar Samuthayam residing at Kottar in Agasteeswaram Taluk, on their behalf and as elected trustees of the said Samuthayam, for declaration that the suit temples were denominational ones and for injunction.

3. Their case was as follows:

Sri Chentra Disai Ventra Vinayagar temple and its sub-temple Sri Mutharamman temple along with their properties belonged to the Sengunthar Mudaliar Samuthayam of Kottar; the temples were founded by the Sengutha Mudaliar community people from out of their own contribution; besides several endowments also had been created and the said temples being maintained and administered by the elected trustees from out of the income from the properties, and the religious services and other festivals in the temples also being regularly conducted by the people of that community pursuant to a scheme in O.S.No.65 of 1116 M.D. on the file of the District, Nagercoil, as confirmed by this Court in A.S.No.633 of 1956; the decree had, thus, confirmed the right of the community to administer and manage the affairs of the temples and their properties; no member of the public outside the said community ever interfered in the administration of the temples and their properties; whileso, the authorities had taken steps to appoint trustees for the administration of the temples were religious denominational ones belonging to the Kottar Senguntha Mudaliar Samuthayam and against the rights guaranteed under Art.26 of the Indian Constitution and under Sec.107 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act, 1959, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’); the representatives of the community took proceedings for getting declaration under Sec.63(a) of the Tamil Nadu Act 22 of 1959 before the Deputy Commissioner, H.R. & C.E., Madurai, in O.A.No.49 of 1968; the said application was dismissed; the appeal filed before the appellant herein in A.P.No.41 of 1968 was also dismissed; the suit O.S.No.24 of 1971 was dismissed as also A.S.No.465 of 1974 on the file of this Court on 14.6.1978; the defendant had no right to interfere with the administration and management of the temples by the representatives of the Samuthayam; and this had necessitated the filing of the suit for a declaration as stated supra.

4. The appellant/ defendant resisted the suit contending inter alia as follows:

The suit temples were public religious institutions coming within the purview of Act 22 of 1959 s defined under Sec.6(20) of the Act; the temples did not belong to Kottar Senguntha Mudaliar Samuthayam; the plaintiffs were not the elected trustees and the representatives of the said community and the origin of the temples also were not known; there was no deed of dedication; the temples were not vested with the plaintiffs community; no doubt, the plaintiffs community was a section of the Hindu community, but the temples were not the private temples of the said community; they were public temples and the administration and management were not done by the people belonging to the plaintiffs community; the election for trustees under the scheme decree had so far not been done; the Department took steps to bring the administration within the ambit of the Act; moreover, a number of persons belonging to Senguntha Mudaliar Community filed O.S.No.34 of 1971 claiming the temples as private temples; the suit was dismissed holding that it was a public religious institution; the decree in O.S.No.34 of 1971 would operate as res judicata against the plaintiffs in filing the present suit; the Department had got power to appoint trustees for the suit temples; there were different Sannathis for Vinayagar, Shiva, Devi and Natrajar and there were separate Vimanams for each deity; the patta for the temples properties was in the name of the main deity; there was a pa