JUDGMENT

The plaintiff is the appellant herein.

2. The plaintiff filed O.S.No.408 of 1995 before the Principal District Munsif's Court, Kumbakonam, for declaration that the first plaintiff and after him plaintiffs 2 and 3 are entitled to manage the affairs of "Yoga School Friends Society" and for consequential injunction, restraining the defendants, their men from any way interfering with the affairs of the society housed in the building. The suit was decreed by the trial Court. The defendants filed A.S.No.93 of 2000 before the Additional Sub Court, Kumbakonam. The learned Additional Subordinate Judge was pleased to allow the appeal and dismissed the suit. As against the same, the present Second Appeal has been filed by the plaintiff.

3. The plaintiff has contended that the suit schedule property was originally purchased by his father on 21.09.1936 under Exhibit A1. On 21.06.1937 under Exhibit A4, he executed a Will in favour of his wife and the plaintiff. The "A" Schedule property in the said Will were bequeathed in favour of his wife and after her life time, it was absolutely given in favour of the plaintiff. As far as the "B" Schedule property is concerned, the same was bequeathed in favour of the plaintiff with a condition that he should perform the charities without any power of alienation. According to the plaintiff, under the said Will, he was empowered to manage the "Yoga School Friends Society" in the said "B" Schedule property to practice yoga. Apart from practising yoga, some other charitable and spiritual obligations were also annexed to the said "B" Schedule property.

4. The plaintiff further contended that the defendant and its members have formed a new society under the name of the first defendant in the year 1990 and attempting to usurp the management and administration of the Yoga School run by the plaintiff in the schedule mentioned property. The plaintiff further contended that the second defendant who is the managing trustee of the first defendant's society, has written several letters under Exhibits A2, A5, A7 to A9, admitting the Exhibit A4 Will and the right of the plaintiff to administer and manage the Yoga School. The first defendant had filed a caveat, alleging that the first defendant's Sangam is the absolute owner of the super-structure and site and has stated falsely that the defendant Sangam is in management of the yoga centre for long number of years. This has created a cloud over the management and administration of the "Yoga School Friends Society" run by the first plaintiff and hence, the present suit.

5. The defendant filed a written statement contending that the first plaintiff's father is not the founder of "Yoga School Friends Society" and he was only a member of the said society. According to the defendant, the said property was purchased by plaintiff's father from his funds and from the funds, contributed by the members of the defendant Sangam. The defendant disputed the validity of Exhibit A4 Will. The defendant further contended that under Exhibit B1 book, one Mr.T.S.Ramanujam has contended that the father of the first plaintiff has orally gifted the schedule mentioned property in favour of the Sangam and hence, the building belongs to the first defendant Sangam. The defendant further contended that at various points of time, the first plaintiff was also functioning as the President, Secretary or Treasurer of the first defendant's Sangam. He further contended that except joining with the other members of the society in doing the yoga work, the plaintiff has no independent right or management over the said Sangam. According to the plaintiff, the first defendant Sangam is a registered society having members not only in Tamil Nadu but also in various other states. The defendant further contended that the first defendant Sangam is the only Sangam in existence from the year 1940 onwards and the second defendant, joined the said Sangam in the year 1945.

6. The defendants further contended that