Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. The points that arise for consideration in this appeal are:

(1) Whether the trustee of a religious endowment is entitled to transfer the trust properties by way of a gift or settlement deed?
(2) Whether Article 59 of the Limitation Act applies?

5. Point No 1:- It may be relevant to notice the three documents Exs. B-1, A-5, and A-6 which are placed on record. Under Ex. B-1 the plaintiff transferred the entire Math property in favour of defendants 1 to 4. Under A-6 Agreement, defendants 1 to 4 consented to transfer the management in favour of a person nominated by the first plaintiff. Under A-5 registered Will, the plaintiff bequeathed all her properties in favour of one Umapathi Swamy. In this Will the properties are referred to as the personal properties of first plaintiff but not as the Math properties. The recitals in Ex.B-1 clearly state that the first plaintiff has conveyed her absolute rights in the trust properties in favour of defendants 1 to 4. The first plaintiff was a Mathadhipathi or a Shebait in respect of the Rathi Matham both in respect of secular and religious aspects. She had transferred the entire properties in favour of defendants 1 to 4. Ex. B-1 is a conditional gift. The gift is made subject to the maintenance of the first plaintiff by the defendants 1 to 4. The transfer is, therefore, undoubtedly for pecuniary consideration.