CRP(MD)No.529 of 2022

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 13.03.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

CRP(MD)No.529 of 2022

and

CMP(MD)Nos.2308, 7241 of 2022

L.Prema

: Petitioner

Vs.

Arulmigu Harasaba Vimochana Perumal Thirukovil,

Kandiyur, Thiruvaiyaru Taluk,

Rep. by its Executive Officer

: Respondent

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of

India to call for the records relating to the docket order passed by the learned II

Additional District Judge, Thanjavur, in C.R.P.No.20 of 2017, dated 06.09.2021,

confirming the order passed by the Revenue Court, Thanjavur, in P.T.No.79 of

2017, dated 04.08.2017 and set aside the same.

For Petitioner

: No appearance

For Respondent

: Mr.V.Chandrasekar

*****

1/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRP(MD)No.529 of 2022

ORDER

The respondent Temple has filed an application in P.T.No.79 of 2017 under

Section 19(3) of the Tamil Nadu Public Trust (Regulation & Administration) Act,

1961, before the Revenue Court, Thanjavur, for eviction of the petitioner from the

property in S.No.13/1A to an extent of 0.52.5 Ares, which belongs to the Temple.

The Revenue Court, by order dated 04.08.2017, allowed the petition and directed

the petitioner to vacate the property. As against the same, the petitioner preferred

C.R.P.No.20 of 2017 under Section 22 of the Tamil Nadu Public Trust (Regulation

& Administration) Act, 1961, before the II Additional District Court, Thanjavur

and the same was dismissed by order dated 06.09.2021. As against the concurrent

findings of the Courts below, the petitioner has moved the present revision.

2.When the revision petition came up for hearing on 05.09.2022, the learned

Counsel for the petitioner filed a memo that he has withdrawn the vakalath and is

not having any instructions. Therefore, the revision petition was listed in the name

of the petitioner and the learned Counsel was directed to inform the petitioner

about the listing of the matter. However, there is no representation for the

petitioner.

2/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRP(MD)No.529 of 2022

3.The case of the petitioner is that the property in S.No.13/1A belongs to one

Appavu Gounder and the petitioner, being a descendant of the said Appavu

Gounder, is enjoying the property. She denies the title of the respondent and claims

that the property was given to Appavu Gounder by the Thanjavur Aranmanai

Devastanam in the year 1935. She also contended that the name of the Temple was

wrongly included in the patta during UDR survey and as against the same, she has

also initiated a proceeding before the District Revenue Officer. By taking

advantage of the patta, the respondent has also filed a suit in O.S.No.70 of 2014

before the District Munsif Court, Thiruvaiyaru, seeking a permanent injunction

restraining the petitioner’s son from construction and the same was dismissed as

withdrawn.

4.It is the further case of the petitioner that the petition filed by the

respondent under Section 19(3) of the Tamil Nadu Public Trust (Regulation &

Administration) Act, 1961, before the Revenue Court is not maintainable, since

there is no tenancy agreement between the parties. There is a specific provision

under Section 78 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments

Act, 1959, for eviction of persons in possession of Temple land. Therefore, the

3/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRP(MD)No.529 of 2022

petitioner, in her grounds, sought for interfering with the orders impugned on the

ground of lack of jurisdiction.

5.Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the property

comprised in S.No.13/1A belongs to the Harasabhavimochana Perumal Temple

situated in Kandiyur Village in Thiruvaiyur Taluk, Thanjavur District. This land

was let out for cultivation to the grandfather of the petitioner and after his death,

the husband of the petitioner cultiva