AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The sole point which calls for consideration is, whether the Trust created under the unregistered will dated 26.10.1960 executed by Periaswami
Naidu, is a ""Trust"" which would come within the ambit of S. 5(d)(i) of T.N. Act 58 of 1961 or it is a religious trust. Both the authorities having
concurrently held that the intention was to create only a trust and it is a trust charitable in nature, and no religious obligation having been mentioned
in the will, and in the absence of any document or accounts produced in support of the contention that the Trust had any connection with the
religious festivals conducted in any Hindu temple, this revision is preferred. Mr. Ravindran made a marathon effort to claim that, if a Hindu creates
a charity for feeding, and if the said feeding is connected with a religious festival in a Hindu temple, then the trust so created is a religious trust
within the meaning of the Act.
In creating a Trust, mainly because Periaswami had no issues, he would state that the income derived from the properties which he had
purchased on 14.3.1960, shall be utilised for feeding the yatrigars who gather at Vadalur Mangammal choultry on the Thai Poosam Day being
celebrated in the Vadalur Ramalingaswamigal Madam. Therefore, he had earmarked the relevant date, when the travellers assemble in a particular
choultry on a particular day.
3, As far as Sri Ramalingaswamigal is concerned, he was a saint, who propagated the concept of worshipping only jothi'' and not an idol worship
as known to Hindu theology. Therefore, when people gather in large numbers at Vadalur on a Thai Poosam Day, the donor had thought that
whoever stays on that day in a particular chatram are to be fed out of the income derived from the land. It is, therefore, concurrently held by the
authorities that the main intendment in creating the trust was to feed the people assembled in a particular place on a particular day, and for
identification of relevant date, he had mentioned Thai Poosam being celebrated in the Vadalur Sri Ramalingaswamigal Madam. He had not allowed
the properties to be managed by any temple authorities or to be utilised as part of any religious festival to be conducted in a temple or madam. Yet,
Mr. Ravindran, would plead that, if a Hindu creates a charity with reference to a Hindu festival in a day, then it will be a religious charity, and for
which purpose, he relies upon the following decisions.
Annamalai Ayee Chatram v. Authorised Officer, 99 Law Weekly 1030 takes the extreme view by holding that ""Our Hindu tradition does not
draw a line of distinction between religion and charity and charity is always regarded part of religion and religious observance."" If it is so any charity
created by a Hindu, automatically it becomes a religious charity. Whether it is connected with any religious festival in a temple or not, the criteria to
find out the religious nature of trust would not, be whether it is made by a Hindu or not, but it is the nature or character and the purpose for which a
trust is created which alone will have to be looked into. Therefore, as pointed out in Ramaswami v. Aiyasami, AIR 1960 Madras 467 when a trust
is created with the object of feeding a set of persons of an uncertain or fluctuating body, then it will be a public and charitable trust. In the instant
case, whoever turns out to be a traveller assembling in a particular Madam irrespective of any particular caste or creed; would be entitled to be
fed, and as far as Ramalingaswamigal was concerned, he was preaching universal brotherhood so as to shed the narrow concepts existing in
Hinduism. He stressed on the need to feed the poor as a mode for salvage. Therefore, merely on the plea that benefactor had been a Hindu, it is
not possible to hold that a charity of feeding on a festival day created by him, would automatically be one of religious charity and not a public or
charitable trust.
In Narayana v. Commissioner of Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, AIR 1961 Madras 258 ILR 1961 Madras 656 in
dealing with the definition of religious charity in S. 6(13) of Act 19 of 1961, stressing on the aspect ""associated"" it was held that when the primary
purpose was to feed Brahmins attending the festival, it has a real connection with the Rathodsavam, which is a religious festival of a Hindu
character, and hence, the charity was a religious charity within the meaning of S. 6(13). It was emphasized therein that ""the association
undoubtedly must be real and not imaginary, but to constitute ""association"", it is predicted that the administration of public trust must be controlled
by the persons responsible for celebrating the religious festival in a temple or madam or to be an integral part of the festival or observance."" In the
instant case, the administration is in no way connected with those who conduct the Thai Poosam Festival in Vadalur Sri Ramalingaswamigal
Madam.
In Ramaswami v. Aiyasami AIR 1960 Madras 467 it was pointed out that ""on legal principles"" even the dharmam of feeding Brahmins as a
class--not necessarily destitute or only of the poor but an indefinite class not restricted to privileged individuals--would constitute a public religious
or charitable trust. It was a matter which arose by invoking S. 92, C.P.C. and it was held that the recipient of the benefits belonging to a particular
community or sect would not make any difference in finding out the real character of the Trust.
Vedapatasala Trust, Sooramangalam v. State of Tamil Nadu 94 L.W. 137 = 1981-1-M.L.J.225, dealt with a distance wherein a trust created
for running a Vedapa-dasala was held to be a trust of public nature, and hence, such a trust shall be deemed to be a religious trust of a public
nature.
Venkataswami Naidu v. State of Tamil Nadu 86 L.W. 521 = 1973 I M.L.J. 400, took note of the predominant intention for the purpose of
creating a trust to be recited, and when the main intention was to carry out certain mandagapadis to deities, and to feed the bakthas who collect, it
was mainly a religious charity.
Dhrul Ulam Madarsha by its Trustee v. State by Collector of Thanjavur 94 L.W. 807-1981 T.L.N.J. 438. dealt with free boarding and lodging
of students and the reference made in the deed to brings out a clear intention to show that it was really intended to impart religious instructions to
the students, and hence, it is a religious trust of a public nature.
Therefore, as pointed out in Commr., M.H.R. & C.E. v. Narayana A.I.R.1965 S.C. 1916 , one must find out whether administration of a
public charity is controlled by the person responsible for celebrating the religious festival in a temple or math or to be an integral part of the festival
or observance. This aspect emphasised by the Supreme Court being totally absent in the instant case, and the object concerned with Sri
Ramaligaswamigal Madam for feeding the poor in a different Chatram on a particular day cannot be treated as a religious charity. The fixing of the
day as Thai Poosam would not by itself be sufficient to hold that the charity is a religious charity.
Therefore, the revision petition is dismissed with costs.