The court ruled that temple property cannot be alienated by trustees without obtaining necessary permissions and demonstrating community consent as per applicable law.

JUDGMENT :

P. VELMURUGAN, J.

1. The respondents 1 to 4 in both the appeals filed the suit in O.S.No. 48 of 2015 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Madurai, for declaration and permanent injunction restraining the defendants 4 to 7 in the suit, who are the appellants in A.S(MD)No.138 of 2015, from in any way alienating, encumbering and putting up constructions in the suit property and for costs. The Trial Court, after considering the oral and documentary evidence, decreed the suit. Aggrieved over the same, the defendants 1 to 3 in the suit filed the appeal in A.S.No.225 of 2015 and the defendants 4 to 7 in the suit filed the appeal in A.S.No.138 of 2015. Since both the appeals arise out of the same judgment and decree, both are heard together and disposed of by this common Judgment. For the purpose of clarity, the parties are referred to as per their rank before the Trial Court.

2. (i) The case of the plaintiffs in brief as per the plaint is that the suit property originally belongs to one Muthu Thevar and the same was purchased by one Ammayappan Poosari, who was then the Trustee and Poojari of the Angala Parameswari Sonaiya Swami Temple, Arappalayam, Madurai, and the said Poojari Ammayappan purchased the suit property in the name of the temple under registered sale deed, dated 07.07.1951, from the original owner Muthu Thevar. From the date of purchase, the property belongs to the said Angala Parameswari Sonaiya Swami Temple. Except the temple, no others have any right and title whatsoever to deal with the property. The Town Survey Register also stands only in the name of the temple represented by its Trustee and the Register given by Madurai Corporation also shows that the property stands in the name of the temple. The said Angala Parameswari Sonaiya Swami Temple belongs to about 600 families of Panaiyur Rajakula Agamudiyar Community, who are settled at Panaiyur, Malaipatti, Sakkimangalam, Nagamalai Pudukkottai, Kattamankottai, Thenoor etc. They have been worshipping and administering the temple and the properties belonging to the temple. The plaintiffs belong to the said community and they were members of the temple committee. The temple at present in the administration of the defendants 1 to 3 and they have only right to administer and manage the temple and the properties and they do not have any right to alienate or in any way deal with the properties of the temple. The plaintiffs themselves had held various posts in the temple committee and Tiruppani committee.

(ii) The suit property was leased out to one K.Rajendran, the father of the 5^th defendant in or about 1986 for running a school and the said K.Rajendran passed away in 2007. The 7^th defendant became the Secretary of the School and there were various litigations between the defendants 1 to 3 as temple committee and the 7^th defendant. The plaintiffs had filed the suit in O.S.No.900 of 2008 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Madurai against the defendants 1 to 3 for permanent injunction not to alienate the suit property belongs to the temple. The defendants 1 to 3 being the President, Secretary and Treasurer of the temple have only right to administer and manage the temple and they have no right to alienate or encumber the suit property. The defendants 1 to 3 themselves had filed the suit for ejectment in O.S.No.294 of 2005 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Madurai. In the said su