http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5  

PETITIONER: COMMISSIONER, MADRAS  HINDU RELIGIOUS ANDCHARITABLE ENDOWMEN

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: NARAYANA AYYANGAR AND OTHERS

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24/02/1965

BENCH: SHAH, J.C. BENCH: SHAH, J.C. SUBBARAO, K. BACHAWAT, R.S.

CITATION:  1965 AIR 1916            1965 SCR  (3) 168

ACT:    Madras Hindu ReLigious and Charitable Endowments Act,  19 of    1951,    s.   6(13)--’Religious    Charity’    meaning of--Samaradhanai  Fund for the purpose of  feeding  Brahmins attending the celebration of a festival at a temple, whether such charity.

HEADNOTE:    A  Samaradhanai  Fund  was started  for  the  purpose  of feeding       Brahmin      pilgrims      attending       Sri Venkatachalapathiswami  shrine  at  village  Gunaseelam  (in Madras  State) on the occasion of Rathotsavam festival.   On the  enactment of the Madras Hindu Religious and  Charitable Endowments  Act 19 of 1951 the Deputy Commissioner of  Hindu Religious  and Charitable Endowments  initiated  proceedings under  s. 57(d) of the Act and held that the aforesaid  fund was  a religious charity’ within the meaning of s. 6(13)  of the  Act.  His order was upheld by  the  Commissioner.   The Trustees  of  the Fund then filed a suit to  set  aside  the order  of the Commissioner contending that the  Samaradhanai Fund was neither a public charity nor a religious  charity’. In  s. 6(13), ’religious  charity’ is defined as  a  "public charity  associated with a Hindu festival or  observance   a religious character, whether it be connected with a math  or temple  or  not".   The  trial  court  decided  against  the trustees but the High Court held in their favour.  According to the High Court feeding the Brahmins was a public  charity but it was not a ’religious charity in as much as those  who conducted   the   celebration   of   the Rathotsavam at  the shrine  had no control  over the feeding of Brahmins out  of the Samaradhanai Fund. On appeal to the Supreme Court by the Commissioner, with special leave.     HELD:  Feeding of Brahmins out of the Samaradhanai  fund was  associated with the celebration of the  Rathotsavam  at the Venkatachalapathiswami shrine.     The expression "associated" in s. 13 of Act 19 of   1951 is  used having regard to the history of the legislation the scheme  and objects of the Act and the context in  which  it occurs,  as meaning "being connected with" or  "in  relation to".  The  expression  does not import any  control  by  the authorities who manage or administer the festival. There are

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 5  

many  Hindu  festivals which are celebrated  by  the  public generally  without any connection with any temple  or  math. The  definition  of  "religious  charities"  includes   such general  festivals and observances. It cannot be  said  that there  must  always  be a set of  persons  who  control  the celebration of a festival or an  observance. F171 D-G]     Nor can it be contended that the expression  "associated with   a  Hindu  festival  or  observance  of  a   religious character" in the definition of "religious charity"  implies that  the  public charity must be an integral  part  of  the Hindu religious festival or observance. There is nothing  in the  Act which indicates any such intention on the  part  of the legislature. [171 H]

JUDGMENT: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 844 of 1963. 169        Appeal by special leave from the judgment and  decree date November 1, 1960 of the Madras High Court in Appeal No. 199 of 1957. A. Ranganadham Chetty and A.V. Rangam, for the appellant.        A.V.  Vishwanatha  Sastri  and  R.  Thiagarajan,  for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by     Shah, J. Venkatarama lyengar, Kasthuri Iyengar and Ranga lyengar,   residents   of  the   village   Kariamanikam   in Tiruchirappalli  District,  with the aid  of  contributions, subscriptions  and donations set up a Samaradhanai Fund  for feeding       Brahmin      pilgrims      attending       Sri Venkatachalapathiswami  shrine at village Gunaseelam on  the occasion of Rathotsavam festival. Between the years 1936 and 1940  seven acres of land were purchased for Rs.  10,500  to provide a permanent income for the Fund.  It was found  that the  expenses incurred for the Rathotsavam festival did  not exhaust  the entire income and the balance was utilised  for Vanabhojanam  in  Kariamanikam  village  in  the  month   of Kartigai and on the Dwadesi following Vaikunta Egadesi day.     The President, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Board,  sought  to levy for the years 135 1  to  1354  Fasli contributions under s. 69 of Madras Act 2 of 1927 in respect of the Fund. But in Suit No. 297 of 1947 of the file of  the District Court at Tiruchirappalli that claim was disallowed. The District Court held that the charity was not a "specific endowment"  within the meaning of Act 2 of 1927.  After  the Madras  Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act 19  of 1951 was enacted, the Deputy Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments initiated a fresh proceeding under s. 57(d) of that Act and held that the Samardhanai Fund  was a "religious charity" within the meaning of s. 6(13) of  the Act.  Against  that  order  an appeal  was  carried  by  the trustees of the Fund to the Commissioner of Hindu  Religious and  Chartiable  Endowments.   The  Commissioner  held  that feeding  Brahmins in connection with the religious  festival of Hindus was a public charity and also a religious  charity within the meaning of s. 6(13) of Madras Act 19 of 1951.     The trustees of the Fund then instituted Suit No. 181 of 1954   in   the   Court   of   the    Subordinate     Judge. Tiruchirappalli  to set aside the order of the  Commissioner on the plea that the Samardhanai Fund was a private  charity not  associated  with  any Hindu festival or  service  in  a temple and was not religious charity or a specific endowment or  a public charity, and that it could in no manner  become subject  to  control  of  the  Commissioner,  Madras   Hindu

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 5  

Religious and Charity Endowments.  The suit was resisted  by the  Commissioner  contending  that the Fund  was  held  and administered  for a religious charity viz.  feeding  Brahmin pilgrims   on  the  occasion  of  a  Hindu  festival.    The Subordinate Judge held 170 that  the Fund was a public charity and that it was also  "a religious  charity"  within the meaning of s. 6(13)  of  the Act,.  the charity being associated with the Hindu  festival of Rathotsavam at the Gunaseelam temple.  In appeal  against the order of the Subordinate Judge dismissing the suit filed by  the  trustee_, the High Court of Madras  held  that  the Samardhanai Fund was a public charity within the meaning  of s. 6(13) of the Act, but not being associated with any Hindu festival  or  observance  of a religious  character  it  was not  a  "religious  charity" and  the  Commissioner  had  no jurisdiction to bring it under his control.  The High  Court accordingly allowed the appeal and decreed the suit filed by the  trustees.  With  special leave,  the  Commissioner  has appealed to this Court.     The  only question which falls to be determined in  this appeal  is whether on the facts found by the Court of  First Instance  and confirmed by the High Court,  the  Samardhanai Fund is a "religious charity" within the meaning of s. 6(13) of  Madras  Act  19 of 1951. Clause (13)  of  s.  6  defines "religious charity" as meaning "a public charity  associated with   a  Hindu  festival  or  observance  of  a   religious character, whether it be connected with a math or temple  or not".  The definition prescribes two conditions which go  to constitute  a  religious  charity: there must  be  a  public charity  and  that charity must be associated with  a  Hindu festival  or  observance, co of a religious  character.   If these  be  fulfilled, a public charity will be  a  religious charity, even if it is not connected with a math or  temple. The Subordinate Judge held on the evidence that the "charity in  question is a feeding charity conducted during  the  ten days    of    the    Rathotsavam     in     the     Prasanna Venkatachallapathiswami temple in Gunaseelam in the month of Purattasi.  Only  Brahmins are fed and not  other  community people.   There  are  similar  feeding  charities  for   the different communities conducted by the respective  community people.  The charity in question has no connection with  the Gunaseelam  temple in the sense that the food  "prepared  is not  offered  to the deity, and feeding is done not  in  the temple  premises  but at a separate place  originally  in  a specially  erected  pandal  and  now  in  Seshagiri   Iyer’s choultry (Dharamshalla).  The other communities are not  fed at  this charity...... The temple authorities have no  voice in  the conduct of the feeding", and the High  Court  agreed with that view. The Subordinate Judge held on those findings that  the Samardhanai Fund was a public charity  within  the meaning  of s. 6(13) and with that view also the High  Court agreed.   The Subordinate Judge also held that  the  charity was associated with the Hindu festival of Rathotsavam in Sri Prasanna       Venkatachallapathiswami       temple       in Gunaseelam--Rathotsavam  being an observance of a  religious character  when  the deity is taken out in procession  in  a chariot-and  therefore the charity in question  was  clearly one  associated  with  a Hindu festival and  also  with  the observance  of a religious character.  In  disagreeing  with that  view,  the  High Court observed  that  the  expression "associated  with  a  Hindu  festival  or  observance  of  a religious character" imported some unity of purpose or 171 common  object or common endeavour between the festival  and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 5  

the charity and in the absence of such unity, common  object or common endeavour, the charity could not be regarded as  a religious charity within the meaning of s. 6(13)of the  Act. In the view of the High Court that feeding Brahmin  pilgrims during      the     Rathotsavam     festival     of      Sri Venkatachallapathiswami   shrine  at  Gunaseelam   did   not constitute   an  association  between  the  Fund   and   the Rathotsavam festival itself, for the trustees of the  shrine conducting the festival "had no manner of check, control  or supervision  over the feeding charity or Samardhanai  Fund", they could not insist upon the feeding being done during the festival, and "cessation or discontinuance of the feeding by the trustees of the feeding charity may constitute a  breach of  trust on their part but cannot in the least  affect  the due  performance of the Rathotsavam festival itself".   They further observed that belief of the founders of the  charity that  feeding  Brahmins  on the  occasion  of  an  important festival  was meritorious. will not establish "any  link  or connection" between the festival and the charity.     We are unable to agree with the view so expressed by the High  Court. The expression "associated" in s. 6(13) of  Act 19  of  1951  is used having regard to the  history  of  the legislation,  the  scheme and objects of the  Act,  and  the context  in which the expression occurs, as  meaning  "being connected with" or "in relation to". The expression does not import  any  control  by  the  authorities  who  manage   or administer  the  festival.  A Hindu  religious  festival  or observance  may  have a local significance, in  that  it  is celebrated   or  observed  in  a  particular   locality   in connection  with  a shrine, temple or math, or it may  be  a festival  or  observance celebrated  generally  without  any connection  with  any temple or math. In the  case  of  such general festivals or observances there is no one who can  be so  said to control the celebrations, and the definition  of "religious  charity"  includes such  general  festivals  and observances. It cannot be assumed that there must always  be a  set of persons who control the celebration of a  festival or an observance. The test suggested by the High Court  that in  order that there should be, between the charity and  the festival   or   observance   such  a   relation   that   the administration  of the charity must be controlled  by  those who  celebrate  the festival or observance in  a  temple  or math,  besides being inapt in the case of general  festivals and  observances can only be evolved if words which are  not found  in  the definition of "religious charity"  are  added thereto.      Mr.  Vishwanatha  Sastri  appearing on  behalf  of  the respondenttrutees contended that the expression  "associated with   a  Hindu  festival  or  observance  of  a   religious character" in the definition of "religious charity"  implies that  the  public charity must be an integral  part  of  the Hindu  religious  festival   or  observance.  But  there  is nothing in the Act which indicates any such intention on the part of the Legislature.. Mr. Sastri sought to give  diverse illustrations  in  support.  of  his  contention  that  mere feeding  of Brahmins on the occasion of a Hindu festival  or observance will 172 not amount to association within the meaning of s. 6(13). It is  unnecessary  to deal with these illustrations,  for  the definition contemplates  a  public charity which  alone  can be   a  religious  charity  if  the  other  conditions   are fulfilled.  A voluntary celebration of an event of religious significance  by feeding Brahmins does not make it a  public charity.   There must be an institution which may in law  be

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 5  

regarded  as  a  public  charity,  before  it  may  by   its association  with  a  religious festival  or  observance  be regarded   as   a  religious   charity.    The   association undoubtedly   must  be  real  and  not  imaginary,  but   to constitute  association  it  is  not  predicated  that   the administration  of public charity must be controlled by  the persons  responsible for celebrating the religious  festival in  a temple or math or be an integral part of the  festival or observance.     On the facts found, it is clear that on the occasion  of the     Rathotsavam     festival     of     Sri     Prasanna Venkatachalapathiswami  shrine,  pilgrims from  many  places attend the festival and the object of the charity is to feed Brahmins  attending  the  shrine on  the  occasion  of  this festival.   It  is not disputed that setting up a  Fund  for feeding  Brahmins is a public charity.  The primary  purpose of  the  charity is to feed Brahmin pilgrims  attending  the Rathotsavam.  This  public  charity  has  therefore  a  real connection with the Rathotsavam which is a Hindu festival of a  religious  character,  and therefore it  is  a  religious charity  within the meaning of s. 6(13) of Madras Act 19  of 1951.  Surplus income of the Fund is used in Vanabhojanam in the month of Kartigai, and on the day following the Vaikunta Ekadeshi.  it is not suggested that on that account the Fund is not a "religious charity".     We  therefore  set aside the order passed  by  the  High Court and restore the order passed by the Trial Court. There will be no order as to costs throughout. Appeal allowed. 173