Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959

23 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

R. MURALI AND ORS.versusKANYAKA P. DEVASTHANAM AND CHARITIES AND ORS.

2005 INSC 31025 July 2005Dismissed

The appellants, R. Murali and others, sought leave under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure to file a suit for modifying the scheme of administration of the Sri Kanyaka Parameshwari Devasthanam and Charities, alleging mismanagement by the current Board of Trustees. The trustees opposed, contending that the Tamil

K. S. SOUNDARARAJAN AND ORS.versusCOMMISSIONER OF H.R. & C.E.AND ORS.

2015 INSC 85324 November 2015Dismissed

Sundararaja Naidu's 1949 will bequeathed certain properties and directed his brother's son to manage them and perform specific charitable rites. Five members of the testator's community applied under Section 64 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 to have a scheme framed for those chari

W. N. ALLAL SUNDARAMversusTHE COMMISSIONER H.R. & C.E. ADMN. DEPARTMENT & ORS.

2019 INSC 127422 November 2019Dismissed

The appellant, W.N. Allal Sundaram, challenged a declaration that the Bagyammal Trust was a public trust under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, asserting it was a private family trust. The dispute centered on a Deed of Settlement dated 4 June 1926, which entrusted the construction and

PARASAMAYA KOLERINATHA MADAM, TIRUNELVELIversusP. NATESA ACHARI & ORS.

2011 INSC 70222 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Parasamaya Kolerinatha Math, sued the defendants for declaration of title and possession of a Chennai property that housed the Meenakshiamman idol and the founder's statue. The defendants claimed the premises was a public temple belonging to the Viswakarma community. The High Court Single Judge held the

A.T.S. CHINNASWAMI CHETTIAR ETCversusSRI KARI VARADARAJA PERUMAL TEMPLE AND ANR.

1995 INSC 59422 September 1995Dismissed

The Sri Kari Varadaraja Perumal Temple held a devadayan religious inam of 19.58 acres, granted permanently and confirmed by a title deed in 1863. After the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963 abolished minor inams, both the temple and the appellants applied for Ryotwari patta. The

THE IDOL OF SRI RENGANATHASWAMY REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, JOINT COMMISSIONERversusPK THOPPULAN CHETTIAR, RAMANUJA KOODAM ANANDHANA TRUST, REP. BY ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE AND ORS.

2020 INSC 21319 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the idol of Sri Renganathaswamy, challenged a suit filed by the Anandhana Trust seeking civil‑court permission to sell a portion of a property that had been endowed for charitable activities associated with the deity. The central question was whether the 1901 Deed of Settlement created a ‘specific endowm

ADI SAIVA SIVACHARIYARGAL NALA SANGAM & ORS.versusTHE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU &ANR.

2015 INSC 92916 December 2015Disposed off

The petitioners challenged a Government Order (G.O. No.118 dated 23‑05‑2006) that any Hindu with requisite qualifications could be appointed as an Archaka in Hindu temples, arguing that it violated Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution. The Court examined whether the appointment of Archakas must follow the prescriptio

BABA CHARAN DASS UDHASIversusMAHANT BASANT DAS BABAJI CHELA BABA LAXMANDAS UDASI SADHU

2000 INSC 33614 July 2000Dismissed

The dispute concerned the appointment of the Madathipathi (head) of the Shiva Kanchi Udasi Math, Kanchipuram. The Math was founded by a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, and its deed stipulated that succession should follow the Sishya Parampara (guru‑to‑disciple). After the death of the las

THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.versusELEPHANT G. RAJENDRAN & ORS. ETC.

2019 INSC 52312 April 2019Case Partly allowed

The Tamil Nadu government, after receiving a complaint from the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Commissioner, ordered on 01.08.2018 that all idol‑theft investigations being handled by the Idol Wing of the CID be transferred to the CBI. The Madras High Court quashed that order and, under Article 226, appointed

R. M. SUNDARAM @ MEENAKSHISUNDARAMversusSRI KAYAROHANASAMY AND NEELAYADHAKSHI AMMAN TEMPLE (THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER) NAGAPATTINAM, TAMIL NADU

2022 INSC 66511 July 2022Dismissed

The appellant claimed that 26 pieces of suit jewellery kept in the temple's Kudavarai were his personal inheritance as the adopted son of Muthuthandapani Chettiar and sought exclusive possession. The respondent temple argued that the jewellery had been donated by the ancestors of Muthuthandapani as a specific endowment

THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ARTHANARESWARAR TEMPLEversusR. SATHYAMOORTHY AND ORS.

1999 INSC 499 February 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The hereditary trustees of six Hindu temples filed a petition under the Indian Trusts Act seeking permission to sell temple properties, which was rejected by the District Court and initially dismissed by the High Court. The High Court later allowed a review and permitted the sale, but the Commissioner under the Tamil N

R.V.F VENKATACHALA GOUNDERversusARULMIGU VISWESARASWAMI AND V.P. TEMPLE AND ANR.

2003 INSC 5328 October 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a hereditary trustee of a temple, claimed ownership of a shop adjoining the temple and sued for declaration of title, possession and three years' rent arrears. The trial court and first appellate court upheld his claim based on oral testimony, rent agreements, ledger books and a charity commissioner’s or

THAYARAMMAL (DEAD) BY LR.versusKANAKAMMAL AND ORS.

2004 INSC 6986 December 2004Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over property dedicated as a Dharmachatram (choultry) by a Hindu donor in 1805. The plaintiffs claimed occupancy as trustees, while the defendants asserted title obtained through a court sale. The Court held that such dedication creates a charitable endowment, not a trust, and there

T. LAKSHMIKUMARA THATHACHARIARversusCOMMISSIONER, H.R.C.E. AND ORS.

1998 INSC 3412 September 1998Dismissed

The case concerned a scheme for the administration of the Devarajaswamy Temple at Kancheepuram, originally settled in 1909 under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure and modified in 1941 under the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1927. In 1982 the Deputy Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowme

B.K.C. MURUGA KONAR (DEAD)) BY LRS. & ORS.versusV. SETHA KONE & ORS.

1989 INSC 2631 September 1989Dismissed

Members of the Thousand‑Yadhava community filed a representative suit against the trustee of two temples seeking a decree for the rendition of true accounts and payment of amounts due. The defendants contended that the temples were public religious endowments under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowmen

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search