AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K. Gnanaprakasam, J.—A sangam, registered under the Societies Registration Act has been carrying on and administering certain
Urchavams"" and ''ubayams'' (Charities) and whether those charities, would come within the ambit of ""Religious endowment"" has fallen for
consideration in this appeal.
People belong to Vanika Vaisya community of Mannachanallur have formed a sangam and named it as ""Mannchanallur Vanika Vaisya Sangam
(hereinafter called as ""the Sangam"") and registered the same under the Societies Registration Act. The said sangam was represented by their
President and Secretary, who have filed the suit u/s 70(1)(ii) of the Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Act (Act 22 of 1959) read with Order
7, Rule 1, C.P.C. in O.S.No.620 of 1980 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirapalli to set aside the order of the Commissioner of Hindu
Religious and Charitable Endowments (Admn.) Department, Madras dated 19.2.1980 in A.P.No.58 of 1977 and also prayed for a declaration
that the suit properties are not the properties of any religious endowments. The learned Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirapalli decreed the suit on
21.9.1981 and the same was confirmed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in A.S.No.369 of 1984 by the decree and judgment dated
2.1.1996. As against the same, the Commissioner, H.R. & C.E. (Admn.) Department has preferred this appeal.
The Sangam was registered with an object to fester unity among the community of ""Vaniga Vaisya"" and to perform charities, Urcbavams,
Upayams in and out of the funds created by the Vaisya Community. The said Sangam had found the religious private charity trust by way of
settlement deed dated 9.5.1961 whereunder, the properties set out for the said Trust were shown in Schedule ""A"" and the Upayam, which have
got to be carried out were shown in Schedule ""B"". It has been very specifically stated as follows:-
In fact, the Upayams (charities) were done by the ancestors of this community people. It is further recited in the said settlement deed as follows:
Thereby indicating that all Urchavams have got to be performed only by this Sangam. The recitals in the settlement deed and the object of the
Sangam if read conjointly, would make it clear, that the people, belonging to a particular community, joined together to do some charitable work
and therefore, the properties owned by the said sangam cannot have the characteristic of a ""religious charity"" or ""religious endowment"" and that
therefore, the appellant cannot exercise any right over these properties as these properties were held by a particular community people and in fact,
not even a lien was created under the deed dated 9.5.1961 to carry out or to perform the charitable work.
The respondents have filed an application u/s 63(a) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 (hereinafter
called as ""the Act"") before the Deputy Commissioner, H.R. & C.E. (Admn.) Department, Tiruchirapalli, seeking for declaration that the Kattalai''s
performed by Mannachanallur Vaniga Vaisiyar Sangam which is a registered body, will not come under the purview of the Act and the sangam is
entitle to do the charity as per the directions given under settlement deed dated 9.5.1961, The Deputy Commissioner did not accept their case and
dismissed the petition. The respondents have preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, HR & CE (Admn) Department, Madras in
A.P.No.58 of 1997 and the appeal was also dismissed by order dated 19.2.1980. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents have file the statutory
suit u/s 70(1)(2) of the Act before the subordinate Judge, Thiruchirapalli for the reliefs already set forth above.
The trial court, after due consideration had held, that the plaintiffs are entitled to a declaration as the plaintiffs charity is a ""Private Charity"" and
the suit properties are not the properties of any religious charity/endowment but belonged to Sangam, which was registered under the Societies
Registration Act. On appeal by the department in A.S.No.369 of 1984 before this Court, learned single Judge of this Court, considered the entire
matters in issue and came to the conclusion that the recitals in the document show that it has not created any specific endowment as contemplated
u/s 6(19) of the Act. There was also no divesting if the ownership of the property and the income would be sent as per the resolution of the
General Body meeting of the Sangam and the purpose for which the expenditure is to be incurred can also be changed from time to time if the
General Body adopts such a resolution. It was further held that the characteristics of the definition of the specific endowment viz., endowment for
the performance of any specific service or charity in a math or temple, or for the performance of any other religious charity are conspicuously
absent as per the recitals in the settlement deed. In fact, the settlement deed itself provides for changing the object for which certain funds have
been allotted. If the object is changed, the allotment goes. Above all, the temple authorities cannot demand for performance of the charities are
contemplated, itself provides that the settlors are at liberty to change the object and nobody else, except the Vanika Vaisya Community people of
Mannachanallur, has got a right to interfere with the internal affairs of the sangam. The performance of the charities as per the document is an
integral affair, in which neither the temple nor anyone can interfere.
The learned Additional Government Pleader has, on behalf of the appellant, submitted that the ""Upayams"" set forth in the settlement deed dated
10.5.1961 are ""Specific Endowments"" and that therefore, the provisions of H.R. & C.E, Act is applicable and the appellant is entitled to administer
and monitor those Upayams and the respondent cannot perform the said Upayams.
A cursory perusal of the deed dated 9.5.1961 would disclose that the people of a particular community convened the General Body Meeting on
11.2.1960 and endowed the properties to carry out certain Upayams (Charities) and the same was reduced into writing for the benefit and
guidance of future generation of that community people. As per the unanimous decision taken on that day, the settlement deed was also executed
and registered. On 9.5.1961. It was further resolved that the properties will be administered. Upayams would be carried out, by the presidents of
the Sangam as per the by laws of the Sangam as such, the property vests with Sangam and the performance of Charities are carried out as per the
resolutions passed in the General Body, which are amenable to changes and that therefore, the Charities set out in the deed are not specific
endowments and the H.R. & C.E., department cannot poke their nose in the administration.
The learned single Judge, relied upon the decision reported in Commr. for Hindu Religious Endowments Board, Madras Vs. Vinayakar Arudra
Tiruppani Sabha, , wherein it was held
The object of this Society was given as the conduct of the festival during Margali Month on Arudra Nakshtram Day in the temple of the said
Vinayakar at a cost of not less than Rs.150 out of the income which may be derived from the said property. The balance was to be kept as savings
and out of the amount saved in this manner other immovable properties were to be purchased.
In order to constitute a specific endowment, it is necessary that the donor should divest himself of the property and in case of dedication to God
or to a charity, the amount should be set apart and appropriated towards the specific object. In the absence of divesting of property there can be
no specific endowments. In our case, the documents itself provides for changing the object for which certain funds have been allotted. If the object
is changed the allotment of funds to the charities goes. The temple authorities cannot make a demand for performance of these charities since the
settlement deed under which certain charities are contemplated, itself provides that the settlors are at liberty to change the object and nobody else
except the Vanika Vaisya Community people of Mannachanallur has got the right to interfere with the internal affairs of the society. The
performance of the charities as per the document is an internal affair, in which neither the temple nor others can interfere. Therefore, the temple, in
which the charities are to be performed cannot ask for a charge or insist upon the performance of the charities and no charge has been creates for
the same.
We have carefully examined the reasoning and the findings of the learned Single Judge and we are in complete agreement with the findings of
the learned single Judge that the charities to be performed under the settlement deed by the Sangam are not specific endowment as contemplated
u/s 6(15) of the Act and that therefore, we do not find any infirmity of the order, which warrants any interference by this Court.
In the result, this appeal is liable to be dismissed and the same is dismissed. No costs .