[IN THE PRIVY COUNCIL]

1960

Present : Viscount Simonds, Lord Reid, Lord Tucker,
Lord Denning

REV. MAPITIGAMA BUDDHARAKKITA THERO, Appellant,
and
D. E. WIJEWARDENA and others, Respondents

PRIVY COUNCIL APPEAL No. 10 OF 1959

S. C. 183-D. O. Colombo (Inty.) 1338/L

    Buddhist ecclesiastical law Vihare Not a juristic person Will Creation of a trust for the benefit of a Vihare Rights of the trustee, as against the Viharadipathi, in respect of the trust property Buddhist Temporalitie8 Ordinance (Cap. 222), ss. 2, 4 (1), 20, 25 (d) (e).

A Buddhist Temple is not a juristic person and has no legal personality.

The Buddhist Temporalities Ordinance does not apply at all to property which is vested, either by will or deed, in private trustees for the benefit of a temple as a charitable trust. Section 20 of that Ordinance, which vests a property belonging to a temple in the trustee or controlling viharadipathi of that temple, applies only to 8anghika property which has been dedicated to the priesthood as a whole, with all the ceremonies and forms necessary to effect dedication, but with special attention to the priests of a particular temple.

A testatrix devised a paddy field of 250 acres to the Raja Vihare Kelaniya and entrusted to certain named trustees" the management of the same for the benefit of the said Vihare ". Her executors assumed that it was their duty to convey the land to the Viharadipathi and on 27th November 1942 they executed a deed by which they conveyed the land to the Viharadipathi and his successors in office "subject always to the conditions in the said will expressly contained, namely, that the management of the said property for the said Vihare shall be in the Trustees in the said will ".

Held, that the land did not vest in the Viharadipathi by virtue of section 20 of the Buddhist Temporalities Ordinance.

Held further, that the effect of the word" management" in the will was that the trustee  of the will were the persons to decide how the income should be applied for the purposes of the Temple.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Supreme Court reported in (1957) 59 N. L. R. 121. Special leave to appeal was obtained from the Privy Council in view of the order made by the Supreme Court dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution. (59 N. L. R. 409.)

John Pennycuick, Q. C., with S. Bernstein, for the Plaintiff-Appellant.

Walter Jayawardene, for the Respondents.

Cur. adv. vult.

April 26, 1960. [Delivered by LORD DENNING]

This case arises out of the will of Mrs. Helena Wijewardena, a widow who died on 10th November 1940. She took a great interest in a famous Buddhist temple at Kelaniya called the Raja Maha Vihare (Great Royal Temple) and by her will she gave 250 acres of land to it. Since her death the land has been managed by the trustees of her will. They have had possession of it and collected the rents and profits from it. They have used the income for the purpose of the temple, as for instance, in making improvements to it, paying the tom-tom beaters, and so forth. This went on for many years. But in 1954 the Viharadipathi (the High Priest or chief incumbent) of the temple claimed that he was entitled to have from the trustees an account of the income they had received and to have them pay to him the moneys in their hands, and furthermore that he was entitled to possession of the land itself.

On 6th July, 1955, the Judge of the District Court (Sirimane, A. D. J.) held that the Viharadipathi was entitled to an account of the income and payment of it but that he was not entitled to possession of the land. The trustees of the will appealed to the Supreme Court of Ceylon (Basnayake, C.J. and Pulle, J.) who on 18th June 1957, allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the District Court. The Viharadipathi now appeals to Her Majesty in Council. He accepts the decision that he is not entitled to possession of the land, but he