The absence of documentation and evidence invalidates claims of trusteeship, necessitating civil court resolution for property ownership disputes.

ORDER :

S. SRIMATHY, J.

The Revision Petition is filed by a third party against the impugned Fair and Decreetal order dated 20.12.2017 passed in Trust O.P.No.47 of 2017.

2. The brief facts as stated by the revision petitioner/third party is that, the petitioner is one among the legal heirs of M.P.Palaniyappan Chettiyar of Nemathanpatti Village, shortly known as M.P. family (K.ng. kudubam). The said M.P.Palaniyappan Chettiyar had two sons namely M.P.P.Subramaniyan Chettiyar, and M.P.P.Periyakaruppan Chettiyar. The petitioner is coming under M.P.P. Subramaniyan Chettiyar branch. The ancestors of the petitioner were conducting the Annadhanam, Temple Kattalai of Arulmigu Aathmanadha Swamy Temple, Avudayarkovil from time immemorial.

3. The said temple was built by Saint Manikkavasakar who was the forefront Minister of King Arimarthana Pandian. The Saint is revered as one among the Nalvar Tamil Saints. An extraordinary Mandapam was constructed by the Saint Manikkavasakar, using iron screws, stone chain, musical pillars, panchakshara mandapam with high architectural values. The temple is being administered by Thiruvavadurai Aatheenam. Every day six times poojas are conducted in the said Saivite Temple which are as follows:

a. Thiruvanandhal

b. Kaala sandhi

c. Siru kaala sandhi

d. Utchi kaalam

e. Sayaratchai

f. Ardha jaamam

The petitioner’s family is having right to conduct the Siru Kaala Sandhi Kattalai since 18^th century and they are having their own establishment namely which is very next to the temple. The patta was standing in the name of the revision petitioners family. But the same was changed to Siru Kaala Sandhi Kattalai represented by its trustees. Aggrieved over the same the petitioner’s family had filed petition to change the same in the names of the petitioner’s family. Hence vide order dated 05.01.2016 the patta was changed in the name of the petitioner’s family namely Mu.Pe.Pa. Muthuiah Chettiar son of Mu.Pe.Pa Annamalai Chettiar. The 1^st respondent had challenged the same before the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), the 2^nd respondent herein.

4. The revision petitioner further stated that ordinarily the petitioner is residing at Chennai and he would come to his native for functions occasionally. Hence the revision petitioner has engaged Chidhambaram (father of K.C.Duraimurugan 1^st respondent herein) to collect the rent from the tenants for several years. Taking advantage of the same the said Chidhambaram requested and insisted the petitioner’s elders for assignment of the property to him and the petitioner’s ancestor had rejected the said request. However to their shock and surprise, the 1^st respondent had applied for transfer of patta as if he is the Trustee of the Siru Kaala Sandhi Kattalai Trust, when the same was objected the patta was transferred in the name of the petitioner. Thereafter, the 1^st respondent had challenged before the 2^nd respondent RDO. After hearing the rival submission the 2^nd respondent RDO vide order dated 22.04.2017 had cancelled the patta standing in the name of the individuals and transferred the entire patta in the of Siru Kaala Sandhi Kattalai in respect of Survey No.257/2, Avudayarkovil Village and directed the parties to approach the Civil Court to redress their grievance. In the said order both the revision petitioner and the 1^st respondent are parties. Thereafter the 1^st respondent had filed Trust O.P.No.47 of 2017 under section 22, 34 of Indian Trust Act, on the file of Principal District Court, Pudukottai by falsely claiming as heredity trustee of the said Siru Kaala Sandhi Kattalai. The O.P was filed to allow the Trust