SRI SINGAM CHETTY ATTENDROOLOO AND ORS. versus THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

Citation: [2001] 3 S.C.R. 188 · Decided: 25-04-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RAJENDRA BABU · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
SRI SINGAM CHETTY ATTENDROOLOO AND ORS. 
v. 
THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS. 
APRIL 25, 2001 
B 
[S. RAJENDRA BABU AND S.N. VARIAVA, JJ.] 
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1927-Section 77 
(S. 57G in the Amending Act of 1951): 
-r-
C 
Under a deed of settlement property given partly for religious and 
partly for secular pwposes-Order passed by Endowment Board under section 
77 stipulating fifty per cent of income of trust to form religious endowment-
Held, the order is within jurisdiction. 
Generally the intention of sett/or cannot be varied by the court or the 
D Endowment Board-However, in the present case there is no variation from 
the intention of the sett/or-Only percentage has been laid down-Hence, 
order valid-Constitution of India 1950 Article 26. 
One 'S' registered a deed settlement. Under clause 7 of the deed of 
settlement, list E contained various donations of specific amounts. They were 
E of a religious, secular and charitable character. Thereafter, the Endowment 
Board passed an order under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments 
Act, 1927 As per the order fifty per cent of the income of the trust was to 
from the religious endowment No application was fded to modify or set aside 
the order and the order became final. As the order was not coinplied with, 
a notice was issued to the Appellants. The Appellants then filed without any 
F success applications. The Appellants ultimately filed a suit. High court 
dismissed suit and the consequent appeal. 
In appeal to this court, appellants contended that the order of the 
Endowment Board was without jurisdiction because section 77 was not 
applicable to the deed of settlements as there was no endowment to any 
G particular institution. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1.1 Section 77 of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments 
~ 
Act, 1927 is applicable to the settlement deed since clause 7 of the deed of 
H settlement and list E show that endowments have been made and property was 
188 
SRI SINGAM CHETTY ATTENDROOLOO v. STATE [S.N. VARIAVA, J.) 
189 
given partly for religious and partly for secular uses. Therefore, the order A 
passed by the Endowment Board waS within .imisdiction. Further, if the.re is 
~ 
a dispute as to whether Section 77 of the Act a1>plies or not, then the Board 
1. .• 
can decide the question and 1>ass an order which would be within jurisdiction. 
[193-E-F] 
1.2. Under the settlement deed the Board or the Court cannot vary the B 
intention of the settlor and sanction a deviation. (193-G] 
Goda Rao v. State of Madras, AIR (1966) SC 653 and Rattlal v. !j.fate 
of Bombay, AIR (1954) SC 388, relied on. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 9493 of C 
1995. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.9.90 of the Madras High Court 
in O.S.A. No. 93 ofl981. 
Sanjay Parikh and A.N. Singh for the Appellants. 
V Krishnanmrthy V Ramasubramanium for Mis. Arputhan1 and Arona 
& Co. for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
D 
S.N. VARIAVA, J. This Appeal is against a Judgment dated 20th E 
September, 1990. Briefly stated the facts are as follows: 
' 
Sometime in 1899 one Shri Singam Chetty Vakulabharanam Chetty 
registered a Deed of Settlement. For the purposes of this Appeal Clause 7 of 
this Deed of Settlement is relevant. It reads as follows: 
"7. From the rents of landed properties from which incomes are derivable 
F 
and from the interest and other incomes, the charges for the repair of 
hou~es and landed properties, taxes, etc., establishment and other 
expenses, the permanent e>..'Penses mentioned in list E and the e>..-penses •, 
mentioned in list G shall be deducted every year, and out of the G 
balance money, 20 per cent, shall be held in reserve and the residue 
shall be utilized from year to year as the Trustees deem fit, for the 
repair of the houses of Tengalai Vaishnavas, devotees ascetics, pious 
men, preachers and the poor, who live in Vaishnava sacred places and 
other sacred places, their food, education, thread investiture, marriages, 
and for the education of the poor and the young among· us Vaisyas. H 
A 
B 
190 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2001] 3 S.C.R. 
If, however, the inco'me be less than the expenses mentioned in the 
said lists E and G such deficiency shall be met from the reserve of 20 
per cent, set apart in previous years and even if that reserve be 
exhausted all the other items of expenses for charity, etc., except the 
expenses for the worship of t
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.