The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Executive Officer has the right to file a suit for temple properties, and the Civil Court has jurisdiction to decide the title of the properties despite the patta granted under the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams(Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari)Act, 1963. The judgment also clarified the applicability of the Limitation Act and the requirements for adverse possession.

JUDGMENT :

PRAYER: Appeal Suit filed under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.14 of 2019(PDJ Court O.S.No.27 of 2012),, dated 29.3.2019, on the file of Additional Sessions Judge/ Fast Track Mahila Court, Karur.

Aggrieved over the dismissal of the suit filed for declaration and for recovery of possession by the Plaintiff Temple, the present appeal suit came to be filed.

2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the trial Court.

3. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, is as follows:

The suit properties absolutely belong to the Plaintiff temple. The devadayam Inam was granted by Madurai Thirumalai Naicker for the service of Thirumalaimatti permanently. The said Devadayam Inam was confirmed on 29.4.1836 under title Deed (TD) No.1234. Originally, patta has been granted to the plaintiff under Section 8(2)(ii) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams(Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari)Act, 1963 in favour of the temple, which has been challenged by some of the parties and the matter is remanded back regarding the portion of the patta granted to an extent of 4.88 ½ acres out of 6.77 acres to Matcha Naicker. The said Matcha Naicker appears to have purchased A schedule suit properties on 6.7.1992 and on 13.2.1968 from Vellaiyappan Gounder and Katha Naicker respectively. The defendants 3 and 4 seems to have purchased the the above said 3.38 ½ acres on 9.7.2010 from the defendants 1 and 2, who are the son and grand sons of the deceased Matcha Naicker respectively. The fifth defendant seems to have purchased an extent of 1 acre and 50 cents on 9.7.2010 from the defendants 1 and 2 which has been described as 'B' schedule of property. The first defendant claims that his father Matcha Naicker purchased the same on 22.11.1965. On 1.3.2011, the defendants 3 and 4 sold 'A' schedule property measuring an extent of 3.38 ½ acres to one Muruganandham the sixth defendant herein. On 10.3.2011, the fifth defendant sold 'B' schedule property measuring an extent of 1.50 acres to one Saravanan, the 7th defendant herein. During the pendency of the suit, properties also sold by defendants 8 and 9. It is the contention of the temple that the temple is the absolute owner of the suit properties. The order passed by the Settlement Officer will not nullify the rights of the temple. Hence the Suit.

4. The written statement filed by first defendant reads as follows:

The first defendant filed a Written Statement stating that after enforcement of the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963, Inam with respect of the land stood abolished and the land became vested with the Government free of all encumbrances. In the proceedings before the Settlement Tahsildar, Tiruchirappalli, a joint patta was issued in favour of Matcha Naicker, wherein, the temple is also a party, which has been challenged before the Court. The very Settlement proceedings was not appealed and hence, it became final and conclusive in nature. From that date onwards, Matcha Naicker was in possession of the property and after his death, his legal heirs are in possession of the said extent and as far as the 'C' schedule property is concerned, Matcha Naicker and his legal heirs continued in possession, as a tenant. In respect of the remaining 4.88 ½ acres, patta was granted in favour of Matcha Naicker and prayed for dismissal of the suit.

5. The defendants 6 and 7, who are the contesting defendants, filed a Written statement admitting that S.No.793 as a whole is a minor inam land granted to the plaintiff temple for providing the service of making garlands to the deities Thirumalaikatti. The service holders belong to the Konar community were in possession and enjoyment of the said land rendering the designated service to the temple. During 6.4.1892, one of the service holder Vadamalai Konar, son of Seeranga Konar sold the entire extent comprised in S.No.793 in favour of Nallamma Naicker @ Poosari Naicker and Bomma Naicker