GURPUR GUNI VENKATARAYA NARASHIMA PRABHU & ORS. versus B. G. ACHIA, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT MANGALORE AND ANR.

Citation: [1977] 3 S.C.R. 632 · Decided: 15-04-1977 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.R. KRISHNA IYER · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

632 
A 
GURPUR GUNI VENKATARAYA NARASHIMA PRABHU 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
& ORS. 
v. 
B. G. ACHIA, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER; HINDU 
RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT 
MANGALORE AND ANR. 
April 15, 1977 
(V. R. KRISHNA IYER AND A. C. GUPTA, JJ.J 
Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endow1nents Act, 1951-S. 6(17) 
'Public Temple'. 
Ail inference of dedication to the public front the fac1 of 
mbnission into the tetnple and uses by the public is not correct. 
S. 6(17) of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 
1951 defines a temple as "temple" means a place 
b_y 
whatever 
desigruition 
known, used as a place of public religious worship, and dedication to, or for the 
benefit of or used as of right by, the Hindu Community or any section thereof, 
as a place of public religious worship. 
The Deputy Comrnisioner, in a proceeding u/s 57 of Uadras Hindu Reli-
gious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 and the Commissioner on appeal 
held that an ancient temple founded about 400 years ago known as Varadaraj 
Venkataraman Temple at Gurpur in Mangalore Taluk in Karnataka as a 'Pub-
lic Temple'. 
But in the suit No. DS. 106/1961 imtituted by the appellant 
trustees of the ten1ple for a declaration that the temple was a private temple 
and not a temple as defined in s. 6(17) or in the alternative that it was a deno-
minationctl or sectional temple belonging to the Goud Sataswat Brafimin Com-
munity of Gurpur, the Subordinate Judge South Kanara, held on the evidence 
that this was a denominational or sectional temple belohging to the Goud Saras-
wat Community and allo,ved the alternative declaration. 
The High Court on 
appeal found that this was a temple as defined ins. 6(17) of the Act 3nd taking 
a different view of th,e evidence held that 1he temple was a place of religious 
\'ilOrship dedicated to and used as of right by the general Hir_1du Community and 
was thus a public temple. 
On appeal by certificate the Court, 
HELD : (I) It is now well settled that "the mere fact of the public having 
been freely admitted to the temple cannot mean that Courts should readily infer 
therefrom dedication to the pubJic. The value of such public user as evidence 
of dedication depends on the circumstances which give strength to the inference 
that the user was as of right." 
[635 B-C] 
Bihar State Board Religious Trust, Patna v. 
Mahant Sri Biseshlvar Das, 
[1971] 3 S.C.R. ~80 (689) referred to. 
(2) Jn the instant case the circumstances disclosed in evidence do not sup-
port the inference that Hindus generally used the temple as a place of worship 
as of right. The evidence is to the effect (i) that the temple was founded by 
37 Goud Sarasv.'at Brahmin families of Gurpur, (ii) that the tn1stee managing 
the temple belonged always to the- members of said comn1unity, (iii) that 
the- lended properties owned by the temple had aU been endowe? by members 
of the Community, (iv) that none of the \Vitnesses claimed a nght of owner-
ship in the temple and the sma11 sevas \Vere voluntary, (v) that it was the 
members of the Goud Saraswat Brahmin Community who were allowed to 
participate in the more important ceremonies. 
[634 B-D; 6350] 
, (3) The High Court's finding that "numerous en?owment" h.ave .been made 
by Hindus not belonging to Goud Saraswat Brahm1n Com_mun1ty, is not sub-
ported by the evidence in the case. In the context of the Award (Ext. A-13) 
the term general body mentioned therein could only refer to the members 
• 
G. G. PRABHU v. B. G. ACHIA (Gupta, !.) 
633 
of the Goud Saraswat Brahmin Community and not to the Hindu Community 
A 
generally, because the proceeding concluded by the decree was confined to the 
members of the Community. [635 A-BJ 
CIVIL APPELLAT.E JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2176 of 1968. 
Appeal from the Judgment and Decree dated the 18-8-1965 of the 
My5ore High Court in M.F.A. No. 341 of 1964. 
B 
S. T. Desai, K. N. Bhat and R. B. Datar for the Appellants. 
Narayan Nettar for Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivere.d by 
GUPTA, 1. The only question disputed in this appeal is whether a 
C 
temple, known as Varadaraj Venkataramana Temple at Gurpur in 
Mangalore Taluk, in Karnataka, is a public temple or a temple belong-
iug to Goud Saraswat Brabmin Community of Gurpur. 
This is an ancient temple founded about 400 years ago. In a pro-
ceeding under section 57 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable 
Endowments Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the Deputy 
Commiss

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