Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. It is the case of the petitioner that between the years 1817 and 1842, the property management of these kattalais was taken over by the British Government and was subsequently returned. In the year 1910, a scheme was framed for the administration of these two kattalais, and it is stated that the same was upheld. While so, in the year 1927, the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1927 was enacted. In the said Act, Chapter VI-A was introduced by an amendment via Act IX of 1937, enabling the then Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Board to notify the temples and specific endowments governed by a scheme in cases of mismanagement. On 25.05.1937, by a notification via G.O.No.638, the Government appointed Executive Officers for the aforesaid two kattalais on 12.07.1937. When a similar exercise was conducted concerning yet another kattalai, namely, Rajan kattalai, the hereditary trustee therein, being the Dharmapuram Aadheenam, challenged the notification by way of a suit in C.S.No.20 of 1938, which ultimately ended in a compromise whereby the property management was promised to be returned to the Mutt, and the Mutt https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/05/2025 04:23:55 pm ) then became liable to submit all accounts to the supervision of the board. The Act of 1927 was repealed by the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1956. The very same Chapter VI-A in Act of 1927 found its place in Chapter VI of the Act of 1951. It also provided that the notifications issued under the erstwhile Act would be deemed to be notifications under the current Act as well.

1787.”"

Thus, it can be seen that a person with a beneficial interest refers to https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/05/2025 04:23:55 pm ) someone who has an interest in the estate, being entitled to a contingent interest or a portion of the income from the estate, etc.

30. Regarding the law concerning specific endowments under the Act, these are no longer res integra, as clearly established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India concerning the other kattalai, namely, Rajan kattalai of the same Thirukoil, in Sri La Sri Subramania Desika Gnanasambanda Pandara Sannathi, Hereditary trustee of the Rajan Kattalai Sri Thyagarajaswami Koil, Tiruvarur Vs. The State of Madras, represented by Secretary, Revenue Department (cited supra). The meaning of kattalai, in general, was explained as follows:-

"Ordinarily speaking a Kattalai is a special or specific endowment for certain specific services or a religious charity to be performed. For example Uchikala Kattalai in a temple would refer to an endowment for the purposes connected with the midday worship in the temple. Thus Kattalais being in the nature of specific endowments the founder of such kattalais would be entitled to prescribe the line of trustees to manage such Kattalais. The trustees so appointed, will, however, occupy a subordinate position in relation to the general trustee of a temple. It has been held that the general trustee has a right and duty to see that the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/05/2025 04:23:55 pm ) funds in the hands of the trustees of the specific endowments or Kattalais are duly appropriated for the purposes for which they were endowed.
Although a Kattalai is a specific endowment in respect of which it would be competent for the founder to prescribe the line of trustees for its management, the property endowed for the performance of the Kattalai cannot beheld to be transferred in trust to the trustee vesting the legal estate therein in him; it vests in the deity itself. The position of a Kattalai trustee therefore would be nothing more than that of a manager of a Hindu Religious Endowment."