SRI KRISHNA SINGH versus MATHURA AHIR AND ORS.

Citation: [1980] 2 S.C.R. 660 · Decided: 21-12-1979 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
660 
SRI KRISHNA SINGH 
v. 
MATHURA AHIR AND ORS. 
December 21, 1979 
[S. MURTAZA fAZAt ALI AND A. P. SEN, JJ.J 
1-lindu Law-Whether a S11dra fan l·nter the order of Yuti or Sanyasi-'Sant 
}.fat/1' San1pradaya, denonu'nation of Da~na1ni Sect-JVhethcr a Sudra cannot 
enter the order of sanyasi i11 the Sant Math and whether a Brahman alone can 
be a sa.•1yasi among Das11an1is-Essential ceren1onies for 1he initiation of Das-
na1nis-Performance of Atn1a Sradh and reciting Pravesh Mantra Sant fl.fath 
,,,. 
San1pradaya-Mode of succe.\.\ion a1no11g thl' Sant Math-Right ta after-acquired 
property of a Mahant out of Math funds, whether accrues to natural son. 
Abate111e11t of appf'al-Maxini of "actio personalis rnorltur cunt persona", 
applicability of i11 the case of suUs by Malwnt for the recoverv t./ Math property 
-~Order XX/I Civil Procedure Code. 
D 
Respondent M·athura Ahir alias S\vami Hars\vanand, the ~fahant of Garwa~ 
ghat I\Jath fil'ed a suit for decla11ation of title to and possession ot house No. 
C/27 /33 situa.te in I\1ohalla Jagatgunj, Varanasi, for arrears of rent and nzesne 
profits in respect thereof. 
The said prop'e11y was purchased by his Guru Atma 
Vivekanand Paramahnns (ne Baikunth Singh) from out of the income of the 
!\.lath i.e. the offerings (Bhent) made by the devotees. 
The appe11ant v.'ho was 
impleaded oo defendant 5 to avoid further litigation cJ::1imed that this property 
I~ 
acquired by his ]ate father Baikunth Singh alias Swami Atin1 Vivekanand) after 
he became a Guru and out of 1\.·Iath funds devolved upon him th'e natura.I son 
and di~ciple. Since the claim went in fayour of the fi!Spondent 1\.1ahant the 
appellant came in appeal by special leave to this Court. The original plaintiff 
di'ed during the pendency of the a.ppeal. 
The contentions of the appellant were : (i) the plaintiff ~Jathura Ahir being 
F 
a Sudra could not be ordained to a religious order and become a Sanyasf or yati 
and 1herefore inst·alled a mahfVOt of the Garwaghat Math, ~c·;ordin~ 
to 
the 
tenets of the Sant Math Sampradaya, (ii) tn the abseince of proof of the per-
formance of Atn1a Sradli and the recitation of Prave~li Mantran1, neither the 
plaintiff nor his two predecessors Swami Sarupanand an<l Swami At1na Vivcka-
nand rculd be regarded as Hindu Sanyasi; and 
(iii) 
the 
first 
respondent 
Harsawanand the original plaintiff having died during the pen<le11<.:y 
of 
the 
c; 
<!ppenl, 1he appeal abated in its entirety. 
~Dismissing the appea1, the COurt 
~V 
IJELD: 1. 
A math is an institutional sanctum presided aver by a superior 
J \ \Yho combines in himself th: ~ual office ~f being th'e. religious or spiritual head 
of the particular cult or rel1g1ous fraternity and of the manager of the secular 
H 
:rroperties of the institution of the Math. 
[671 D-E] 
The property belonging to a Math is in fa-ct a.ttached to the. office of the 
mahant, and passed by inheritance to no one who does not fill the office. The 
• 
• 
• 
 
I 
' 
~-; 
l 
I 
SRI KRISHNA v. MATHURA AHTR (Sen, J.) 
661 
J]ead of a ~fath, as such, is not ::ii trustee in the .sense in ..vb.ich that term is 
generaJ;y undcrst.:od, but in legal contemplation he has an estate f.or life in its 
permancnl endowments and an absolute property in the incom;! derived front 
the ·J!ferings of h:s followers, subject only to the burden of n1aintaining 
the 
institution. 
[671 A-BJ 
Jn the in"itJnt case, th'~ evidence on record sufficiently es!ablisftes tha.t a Math 
crnnc to be established at Garw.:ighat and the building known ~5 "Bangla !{uti" 
and certain other building-.; including the house in suit ...-:onstituied the endow-
ment of the math itself. 
[671£-F] 
S{lnunanthll Pandara v. Sellappa Chetti (1879) JLR 2 Mad. 175; Gyanasam·· 
b!1andru1 Pand'ara Sannadhi v. Kandasw(lflli Tan1biran1 (1837) lLR 10 Mad. 375; 
J'idya Furna Thirthaswa111i v. Vidyanidhi Thirtl1a Swami (1904) ILR 27 Mad. 
--..... 435; Rani Prr1ka~ih Das v. Anaud Das (1915-16) 43 I.A. 73 (PC); Vidya Vantht 
1'ftirtha v. Baluswa1ni Tyer (1920-21) 48 I.A. 302; r'eferred bJ. 
:!. The math at GarW'aghat belongs to the 'Sant Mat' 
Sampradaya, 
which 
is a religious order and the suit property is Math property. Though the 1\-lath 
at Garwaghat established by Swami S<irupan&nd was of t'ecent origin, the religious 
order denomin&ted as 'Sant Math' has had large following in Puniab and some 
A 
B 
c 
oth-er parts of India since more than a century. 
In a sense, therefore, Swami 
San1panand 

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