W. N. ALLAL SUNDARAM versus THE COMMISSIONER H.R. & C.E. ADMN. DEPARTMENT & ORS.

Citation: [2019] 14 S.C.R. 194 · Decided: 22-11-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
194
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 14 S.C.R.
W. N. ALLAL SUNDARAM
v.
THE COMMISSIONER H.R. & C.E. ADMN. DEPARTMENT &
ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 8349 of 2017)
NOVEMBER 22, 2019
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND
AJAY RASTOGI, JJ.]
Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act,
1959:
ss. 63(d) and 6(19)  –  Trust – Whether a private family Trust
or a ‘specific endowment’ falling under purview of the Act  –  Held:
The ‘Deed of Settlement’ entrusted construction of choultry to be
specifically utilised for the purpose of extending facilities to pilgrims
who visited ‘Devasthanam’ i.e. for the use of general public  – Thus,
the property was endowed specifically for the performance of a
religious charity in the temple and was covered within the scope of
definition of ‘specific endowment’ in s. 6(19).
Words and Phrases:
‘Specific endowment’, ‘religious charity’ and ‘religious
endowment’ – Meaning of, in the context of Tamil Nadu Hindu
Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.
Deputy Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowments declared that the Trust in question was a Public
Trust. The order was confirmed in appeal. Plaintiff’s suit for
declaring the Trust in question as private Trust was decreed by
trial court. The order of trial court was reversed by Single Judge
of High Court. Appeal against the order of Single Judge was
dismissed by Division Bench of High Court. Hence the present
appeal.
   [2019] 14 S.C.R. 194
194
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
195
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD : 1. A ‘specific’ endowment is defined in s.6(19) of
Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act,
1959 to mean: (i) Any property or money endowed for the
performance of any specific service in a Math or temple; or  (ii)
Any property or money endowed for the performance of any
charity in a Math or temple; or (iii) Any property or money
endowed for the performance of any other religious charity.
[Para 12] [202-H; 203-A-B]
2. The expression ‘religious charity’ is defined to mean a
public charity associated with Hindu festivals or observances of
a religious character, whether or not it is connected to a temple
or ‘Math’. [Para 13] [207-B-C]
Commissioner, Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowments v. Narayana Ayyangar [1965] 3 SCR 168
– referred to.
3. In the present case, it emerges from the Deed of
Settlement dated 4 June 1926 that the trustees initially settled a
plot of land for the construction of a choultry in 1921. The choultry
which was in connection with the activities of the Devasthanam
was found to be inadequate to meet the requirements of the
devotees during religious festivals. Consequently, on 4 June 1926,
a Deed of Settlement was executed under which predecessor-in-
interest of the suit property was entrusted with the construction
of an additional choultry. The choultry was to be specifically
utilised for the purpose of extending facilities to pilgrims who
visited the Devasthanam. There was a restraint on the creation
of an encumbrance either on the choultry or on the land. The
choultry was to be utilised at all times for the use of the general
public. No right could be claimed by the predecessor-in-interest
on the choultry. The choultry was to be maintained by her, her
descendants or her nominees. [Para 15] [207-B-D]
4. In view of the clear terms emerging from the deed, the
definition of the expression ‘specific endowment’ in Section 6(19)
is attracted. The purpose of the Act of 1959  is to consolidate the
W. N. ALLAL SUNDARAM v. THE COMMNR. H.R. & C.E.
ADMN. DEPT.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
196
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 14 S.C.R.
law relating to the administration and governance of Hindu
religious and charitable institutions and endowments in the State
of Tamil Nadu. The property was endowed specifically for the
performance of a religious charity in the temple and was covered
within the scope of definition of ‘specific endowment’ in Section
6(19).  The Trial Judge was evidently in error in coming to the
conclusion that there was an absence of a ‘specific endowment’
within the meaning of Section 6(19). The High Court was entirely
correct in reversing the judgment of the Trial Court.  [Paras 15
and 16] [205-D-E]
M J Thulasiraman v. Hindu Religious & Charitable
Endowment Admn. (2019) 8 SCC 689 – relied on.
Case Law Reference
[1965] 3 SCR 168
referred to
Para 13
(2019) 8 SCC 689
relied on
Para 14
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 8349
of 2017.
From the Judgment and Order dated 27.10.200

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