Allowed

Chakkala Dharmaraju v. Sri Anjaneya Swamivari Temple of Jammivaru

Telangana HC3 Aug 2017CRP/5387/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a civil revision regarding eviction from temple land. Ruling that an amendment excluded the Tenancy Act from applying to endowed charitable or Hindu religious properties, the Special Officer's order evicting tenants was set aside.

What did the court decide?

The order passed by the Special Officer and affirmed by the District Judge was set aside. The Civil Revision Petition was allowed.

Chakkala Dharmaraju Vs Sri Anjaneya Swamivari Temple… — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5387 of 2010

¶2

DATED : 03.08.2017

¶3

Between :

¶4

Chakkala Dharmaraju S/o.Latchamma, Aged 68 yrs, Cultivation, Lingamparthi, Yeleswaram Mandal, E.G.Dist. & others.

¶5

.. Petitioners

¶6

And

¶7

Sri Anjaneya Swamivari Temple of Jammivaru Peddapuram, Rep., by its Hereditary Trustee Manager, And ARchaka Jammi Turagarao, S/o.Late Raja Rao, 54 yrs, Cinema centre, Peddapuram, East Godavari District & others.

¶8

.. Respondents

¶9

This court made the following :

¶10

¶11

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶12

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5387 of 2010

¶13

ORDER :

¶14

Sri Anjaneya Swamivari temple and three trustees filed A.T.C.No.14 of 2000 on the file of Special Officer-cum-Junior Civil Judge, Prathipadu, under Section 13 of Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act, 1956, (for short ‘the Tenancy Act’) praying the Court to order eviction of respondents (petitioners herein) from the schedule lands and to grant costs of the petition and to award such other reliefs. The prayer sought by the petitioners therein was allowed and direction was issued to the respondents to evict from the schedule property and hand over the same to the petitioners. Aggrieved thereby petitioners herein filed A.T.A.No.16 of 2006 on the file of III Additional District Judge, Kakinada. By order dated 25.08.2010, the said ATA was dismissed confirming the decision of the original authority. Aggrieved thereby, this revision is filed.

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that The Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act, 1956 was amended vide Amendment Act No.28 of 2002 and by the said amendment SubSection 1 (f) was added to Section 18. In terms of this amendment the application of Tenancy Act, is excluded to the Charitable or Hindu religious or for endowment and therefore, the Tenancy Court has no jurisdiction to deal with the claim made by the temple and the trustees, and the order passed by the original

¶17

¶18

authority as confirmed by the appellate authority are liable to be set aside on this ground alone.

¶19

The fact that the subject lands were endowed is not in dispute. Suffice to note that the petitioners herein are tenants of the subject properties. In fact A.T.C.No.14 of 2000 was instituted by Sri Anjajeya Swamyvari temple along with three trustees of the temple and the pleadings as noted by the original authority would disclose that the subject property is endowed to the temple.

¶20

In view of the said admitted fact, the question for consideration is whether the Tenancy Act is attracted and whether the Special Officer-cum-Junior Civil Judge, has jurisdiction to entertain the petition filed under Section 13 of the Tenancy Act to evict the petitioners herein ?

¶21

Before considering the issue, it is to be noted that in view of

¶22

the submissions made by learned counsels and the decision thereon the Court is not recording elaborately the various issues agitated herein and before the Courts below.

¶23

To appreciate the said contention, it is necessary to note the relevant provisions of the ‘Tenancy Act’ as well as the ‘Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments Act, 1987’ (for short ‘the Endowments Act’).

¶24

Section 18 (1) (f) of the Tenancy Act reads as under :

¶25

“To any agricultural land belonging to or given or endowed for the purpose of any charitable or Hindu religious institutions or endowment as defined by the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act.”

¶26

Section 1 (3) (a), Section 2 (4) and Section 2 (22) of the Endowments Act read as under :

¶27

¶28

“all public charitable institutions and endowments, whether registered or not, in accordance with the provisions of this Act, other than Wakfs governed by the provisions of the Wakfs Act, 1954.

¶29

Explanation : In this clause, the expression “public charitable institutions and endowments” shall include every charitable institution or endowment the administration of which is for the time being vested in any department of Government, or Civil Court, Zilla Praja Parishad, Municipality or local authority, or any company, society, organisation, institution or other person ;

¶30

Section 2 (4) : ‘charitable institution’ means any establishment, undertaking, organisation or association formed for a charitable purpose and includes a specific endowment and dharmadayam ;

¶31

Section 2 (22) : ‘Religious endowments’ means property (including movable property) and religious offerings whether in cash or kind, given or endowed for the support of a religious institution or given or endowed for the performance of any service or charity of a public nature connected therewith or of any other religious charity ; and includes the institution concerned and also the premises thereof.

¶32

Explanation I : All property which belonged to or was given or endowed for the support of a religious institution, or which was given or endowed for the performance of any service or charity of a public nature connected therewith or of any other religious charity shall be deemed to be a religious endowment within the meaning of this definition, notwithstanding that, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, the religious institution has ceased to exist or ceased to be used as a place of religious worship or instruction or the service or charity has ceased to be performed.”

¶33

By virtue of the amendment to Section 18 of the Tenancy Act, application of the Act is excluded to agricultural land belonging to or given or endowed for the purpose of any charitable or Hindu religious institution or endowment as defined by the Endowments Act.

¶34

It is also appropriate to note at this stage that initially when the petition was filed, the jurisdiction of the special officer was available under the Tenancy Act. But during the pendency of the

¶35

¶36

proceedings, the jurisdiction was ousted by virtue of amendment to Section 18 of the Tenancy Act.

¶37

A cumulative reading of the provisions of the Endowments Act, extracted above, would make it clear that the subject lands are endowed to Sri Anjaneya Swamyvari temple and therefore, in terms of the provisions contained in Section 18 (1) (f) of the Tenancy Act, the said Act, has no application to the lands endowed to the Anjaneya Swamivari temple (respondent herein). 13. Having regard to this statutory mandate, the order passed by the Special officer-cum-Junior Civil Judge, Prathipadu in A.T.C.No.14 of 2000 as affirmed by the III Additional District Judge, in A.T.A.No.16 of 2006 is liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside.

¶38

Accordingly the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. However, this order do not come in the way of the respondent-temple and/or its trustees in taking appropriate course of action, as warranted by law, if so advised, to proceed against the petitioners herein. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶39

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this civil revision

¶40

petition shall stand closed.

¶41

3^rd August, 2017 Rds

¶42

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J

Chakkala Dharmaraju v. Sri Anjaneya Swamivari Temple of Jammivaru

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chakkala Dharmaraju v. Sri Anjaneya Swamivari Temple of Jammivaru

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Putti Srinivas Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh represented By its Principal

Chinnapu Ramasubba Reddy, Vs The Government of State of A.P.

Shaik Saida Saheb Vs The State of Telangana

Stuvartpuram Girijana Colonization Society, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

B. Laxmiprasanna, W/o. G. Suresh, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal

M/s. B.P.L.Engineering Ltd., Vs M/s. Ashok Brothers