B.K.C. MURUGA KONAR (DEAD)) BY LRS. & ORS. versus V. SETHA KONE & ORS.

Citation: [1989] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 01-09-1989 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.H. KANIA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

• 
• 
B.K.C. MURUGA KONAR (DEA!)) BY LRS. & ORS. 
v. 
V. SETIIA KONE & ORS. 
SEl'TEMBER 1, 1989 
[M.H. KANIA AND T.K. TIIOMMEN, JJ.] 
Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 
1959-Sections 6(20) and 108-Suit for rendition of Accounts in respect 
of "Temple"-Private Temple-Public religioiis endowment-What 
is-Suit whether maintainable . 
This is defendant's appeal by Special Leave. Respondents 1 to 5 
aloogwith one other person ftled a representative suit on behalf of 
themselves and other' members of Thousaod-Y adhava Community 
against the appellant No. I-Defendant for an order directing him to 
render true accounts of the management of the properties of the 
Thousaod-Y adhava Community including the Sri Ramasami Sri 
Navoeetha Krishnasami i>evasthaoam Temples and their properties_ 
and pay to them tl!_e amount a..:ertain~d as payable on such rendition 
of accounts. The appellant was the Trustee of the said temples. The case 
of the plaintiffS-1"\'Spondeots was that the said temples were private 
religions trusts and the appellant as trostee had committed several acts 
of mismanagement in respect of the proyerties. 
The appellant defendant deriled those allegations and contended 
that the suit as framed was not maintainable in view of the provisions of 
the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 
1959. 
The Tria! Court djsmissed the suit. It held that the said temples 
were not.'~tivate tj!mples belonging to the said community, and that 
both the· temples were covered by the provisions of section 6(20) of the 
A 
c 
D 
E 
F 
Act, and as such the suit was barred by tl:e provisions of the Act and 
thus not maintainable. The plaintiffs preferred appeal to the High 
Court against the' o~der of the Trial Court. Th~ High Court allowed the 
G 
plaintiffs appeal and passed a preliminary decree against the appellant 
No. I-defendant for rendition of accounts while dismissing the suit in 
other respects. The High Court took the view that a.party seeking relief 
of accounting cannot approach the Deputy Commissioneror any other 
authority under the Act and hence the Civif Court was not barred either . 
expressly or by necessary implication from enteriaining the suit so far 
H 
.• 
I 
2 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1989] Supp. 1 S.C.R. 
as it was for accounting. However the High Court did not decide the 
A-
question as to whether the Temples ·were private temples or could be 
regarded as .Public religious endowments. Defendant No. l filed the 
appeal, by special leave. 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court, 
HELD: There is no doubt that in respect of a public trust, 
beneficiaries as a class can file a suit against the Trustee for rendition of 
accounts subject to the baiimposed by Section 92 of the Code of Civil 
' 
Procedure 1908. [SH; 6A] 
· • 
c 
D 
Chapter VIII of the Act has no bearing on the question of the 
liability of a trustee to render accounts to the beneficiaries as a group or 
class and it does not provide for determining or deciding a dispute in 
respect of such rendition of accounts and hence, Section 108 of the said 
Act does not bar a suit like the one filed by Respondent No. 1. [6H; 7A-B] 
Sri Vedagiri Laxmi Narasimha Swami Temple v. Induru Patta-
bhirami Reddy, [ 1967] 1SCR280, referred to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1045-
of 1972. 
-
From the Judgment and Order dated 7.2.1972 of the Madras 
High Court in Appeal No. 549 of .1963. 
K. Ramkumar for the Appellants. 
K. Raj Choudhary, B.R. Agarwal and Ms. Sushma Manchanda 
F 
for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
KANIA, J. This is an appeal by Special Leave against a judg-
ment of a Divisio11 Bench of the Madras High Court delivered on 
(jj February 7, 1972. 
Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 along with one other person filed a 
representative suit on behalf of themselves and other members of the 
Thousand-Yadhava Community residing in Ramayanachavadi Street 
and the other adjoining lanes in North Masi Street, Madurai Town and 
111 adjoining villages against original appellant No. 1 herein, for an orde~ 
'· 
B.K.C. MURUGA v. V.S. KONE (KANIA, J.) 
3 
~ 
directing him to render true and proper ac~ounts of the management 
A 
of the_properties of the Thousand-Yadhava Communit)'. including the· 
Sri .Ramasami Sri Navaneetha Krishnasami Devasthanam Temples and 
their properties and to pay to the plaintiffs the amount ascertained as 
payable on such rendition of accounts with interest and other relie

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.