Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
B.PUGALENDHI
P.M. Chellapandi Poosari – Appellant
Versus
Committee of Administrators, Arulmighu Pandi Muneeswarar Temple, Melamadai, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District, Rep. by its Member, R. Lakshmi – Respondent
ORDER :
B. PUGALENDHI, J.
Arulmigu Pandimuneeswarar Temple is situated at Melamadai, Madurai Town and it was declared as a public temple, by the judgment passed by the I Additional Sub Court, Madurai, in A.S.No.1 of 1925. It is a renowned Temple and 1000s of devotees are thronging in the Temple every day and even more in the weekends and special occasions. The exact date of the establishment of the Temple is not clear, however, it is said to be in existence since 1800. From the available records, it can be seen that the Temple was administered by one Pandi Kodangi Poosari and thereafter, by his son, Periyasamy Poosari. Periyasamy Poosari was having two sons, namely, Pandiyan @ Botha Poosari and Periyannan @ Mahamuni Poosari. Periyasamy Poosari died when his sons were at tender age. Therefore, the Temple was administered by one Valliammal W/o.Periyasamy Poosari. Thereafter, the Temple was administered by Pandiyan @ Botha Poosari and Periyannan @ Mahamuni Poosari, the sons of Periyasamy Poosari. Pandiyan @ Botha Poosari had five sons and Periyannan @ Mahamuni Poosari had five wives, through whom, he had six sons. The Temple is now administered by the heirs of Pandiyan @ Botha Poosari a
The court established that hereditary trusteeship exists among family descendants, but poojariship must be appointed through proper authority, as hereditary rights were abolished under the Act.
The court affirmed that while trusteeship can be hereditary, poojariship is not, as per the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, emphasizing the secular nature of appointments.
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 End....
The court held that hereditary rights to temple administration supersede unilateral executive appointments when trusteeship disputes are pending, emphasizing adherence to statutory requirements and p....
Point of Law : Temple or its precincts cannot be made a place where political parties should look forward to give political asylum to their workers.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
