The court affirmed the hereditary trusteeship of defendants, ruling that plaintiffs failed to prove mismanagement or entitlement to non-hereditary trusteeship under the Hindu Religious Charitable Endowment Act.

JUDGMENT :

PRAYER: The Appeal Suit is filed under Section 70(2) of the Hindu Religious Charitable Endowment Act, 1959, as against the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.119 of 2013 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Thanjavur, dated 29.02.2016.

This Appeal Suit has been preferred as against the decree and judgment passed in O.S.No.119 of 2013 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Thanjavur, wherein the appellants herein have filed a suit before the trial Court to set aside the order passed by the first respondent in A.P.No.90/2010/D2, dated 10.04.2012.

2. The trial Court dismissed the suit. Aggrieved over the said decree and judgment, the present Appeal has been preferred by the plaintiffs.

3. The brief facts of the plaint averments are as follows:-

The plaintiffs have filed the suit under Section 70(2) of the Hindu Religious Charitable Endowment Act, 1959, to set aside the order of the Commissioner of H.R.& C.E., Chennai, passed in A.P.No.90/2010/D2, dated 10.04.2012. Originally, the plaintiffs have filed an application under Section 64(1) of H.R.&C.E Act, before the Joint Commissioner of H.R.&C.E, Thanjavur, in O.A.No.8 of 1994 praying to frame a scheme of administration of temple Arulmigu Athanur Peramanar Temple situate at Varahoor Village, Thiruvaiyaru Taluk, Thanjavur District against defendant Nos. 2 to 5 and the Joint Commissioner was pleased to order in favour of the plaintiffs framing draft scheme of administration of the said temple. Against the said order, defendants 2 to 5 herein have filed an appeal before the Commissioner of H.R.&C.E, Chennai, and the said appeal was allowed through order dated 10.04.2012.

3.1. Sri Peramanar temple was founded by the forefathers of these plaintiffs for the benefit and betterment of their family. The plaintiffs are belonging to Vellalar Community. They have been worshipping the deity as their kula deivam. The community people vacated the village due to the Nawab was willing to marry the Vellalar Community lady, but, they refused to perform marriage to the Nawab due to the reason, they have vacated the local village and have settled at various places. The fore fathers of the plaintiffs acquired landed properties in favour of the deity to perform poojas out of the income derived from the landed property, the fore fathers of the plaintiffs performed Kumbabishegam and also built up a compound wall around the temple with their own costs and also put up an iron gate in front of the temple. The plaintiffs also built up a Mandabam with AC roofing in front of Moolasthanam and have also constructed one Pongu Mandapam (Madapalli) and Thangu Mandapam (Rest Room) in the year 1971. The temple and tank is situate in 3 acres and 29 cents at Varahoor Village. Virtually, it is a denominational temple exclusively belonged to Vellalar Community. Now most of the community people at Kitchipalayam, Palamedu, Pandamangalam and Trichy. Though they are residing in different places, they worship and maintain the temple by spending their own fund.

3.2. While the facts are being so, these defendants 2 to 5 have stealthily grouped this temple with other temples in which they are declared as hereditary trustees. They filed O.P.No.60, 61 and 64 of 1949 before the District Munsif Court, Thiruvaiyaru, for declaration that they are the hereditary trustees and the Siva and Vishnu temples are exempted temples. The matter went up to this Court and obtained order in their favour. In the above said O.Ps., the five Sethis in Varahoor Villge, who are the representatives of five families, formed heads of five Sethis in Varahoor and they belong to Brahmin Community. Several years ago, the said Brahim Community endowed lands for Siva and Vishnu temples in the village and thereafter, they functioned as trustees to the above-mentioned temples examining for the performance for the services. They have not endowed any landed properties to this suit temple. They have not acted as trustees to the suit temple. At