JUDGMENT :

[Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code to set aside the judgment and decree dated 26.06.2002 made in A.S.No.221 of 2001 on the file of the First Additional District Court, Tirunelveli confirming the judgment and decree dated 12.07.2001 made in O.S.No.120 of 1997 on the file of the First Additional Sub Court, Tirunelveli.]

[Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code to set aside the judgment and decree dated 26.06.2002 made in A.S.No.223 of 2001 on the file of the First Additional District Court, Tirunelveli confirming the judgment and decree dated 12.07.2001 made in O.S.No.184 of 1997 on the file of the First Additional Sub Court, Tirunelveli.]

[Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code to set aside the judgment and decree dated 26.06.2002 made in A.S.No.225 of 2001 on the file of the First Additional District Court, Tirunelveli confirming the judgment and decree dated 12.07.2001 made in O.S.No.182 of 1997 on the file of the First Additional Sub Court, Tirunelveli.]

[Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code to set aside the judgment and decree dated 31.07.2004 made in A.S.No.12 of 2004 on the file of the Principal District Court, Tirunelveli preferred against the judgment and decree dated 31.10.2003 made in O.S.No.642 of 1996 on the file of the Principal District Munsif's Court, Valliyoor.]

1. Arulmighu Suyambulingaswamy Kovil, represented by its Hereditary Trustee, is the appellant in these second appeals. These second appeals are arising out of either the suits filed by the temple against the Archakas or the suits filed by the Archakas against the temple. These second appeals were grouped together, as common substantial questions of law arise for consideration regarding hereditary priestship of priests engaged in poojas of the temple.

2.1. S.A.No.2057 of 2002 is arising out of a suit in O.S.No.120 of 1997 filed by the appellant/temple, represented by its Hereditary Trustee against 27 priests engaged in the temple. The appellant sought for a declaration that the defendants/respondents therein were not Archakas (Priests) of the temple and for injunction restraining them from interfering with the performance of pooja and related activities by the temple administration. The appellant also sought for injunction restraining the respondents therein from selling pooja related articles in the temple premises.

2.2. S.A.No.2058 of 2002 is arising out of a suit in O.S.No.184 of 1997 filed by the respondent/Priest Association of the appellant/temple viz., Vuvari Shri Suyambulingaswami Thirukovil Parambari Archakagal Sangam, represented by Pitchiah Gurukkal. The respondent/Association sought for injunction restraining the appellant/Hereditary Trustee from appointing any priests in the temple so as to affect the hereditary right of the members of the Association to do pooja in the appellant/temple.

2.3. S.A.No.2059 of 2002 is arising out of a suit in O.S.No.182 of 1997 filed by the respondent/Priest Association seeking injunction restraining the appellant/Hereditary Trustee from interfering with the hereditary right of the respondent/Association members to perform pooja in the appellant/temple.

2.4. S.A.(MD) No.412 of 2004 is arising out of a suit in O.S.No.642 of 1996 filed by the appellant/temple seeking injunction restraining the respondent therein from interfering with the affairs of the appellant/temple by entering and performing pooja.

2.5. The appellant filed the above said two suits mainly on the ground that he is the Hereditary Trustee of the appellant/temple and the respondents/defendants therein are either the erstwhile priests or their descendants, who are performing the poojas and archanas in the appellant/temple even prior to the coming into force of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as “the HR & CE Act” for brevity). It was also claimed by the appellant that the respondents were