As the administration even under this scheme proved unsatisfactory and there were several serious charges of mismanagement alleged against the Mahant in regard to the affairs of the temple the Madras Legislature enacted Act 19 of 1933 The Tirumalai Tirupathi Devasthanam Act.
As the judgment of the High Court somewhat varied the decree granted by the Subordinate Judge the learned Judges granted a certificate of fitness under Article 133 1 of the Constitution.
As stated earlier, there were two applications made under Order 20 Rule 12, Civil Procedure Code which were numbered Nos.
The defendant Mahant look the matter in appeal but the appeal was dismissed on February 19, 1945, the learned Judges companyfirming the decree of the trial Court with very slight variations.
Among these institutions was the Devasthanam of Tirupathi Tirumalai group of temples, and under orders of the Government the management of the properties of the Devasthanam was transferred to the Mahant of Sri Hathiramjee Mutt whom we shall hereafter refer for companyvenience as the Mahant who, as the head of that Mutt, had his headquarters at Tirupathi.
Appeals 106 and 107 have been filed by the Mahant while the Devasthanam Committee have preferred appeals 108 and 109.
The method suggested by the learned Judges for the calculation of Interest on mesne profits each year is, however, companyrect and interest at 6 per cent p.a.
As is well known, there was a movement in England in about 1840 which disapproved a Christian Government like the East India Company being in charge of or administering Hindu or Muslim religious institutions and the Board of Directors in companyformity with these ideas, effected a change in their policy, and as a result of orders passed by the Board of Directors the authorities in India relinquished charge of the management of such institutions.
As companyplicated questions relative to the title to the several properties claimed by the Devasthanams were raised by the Mahant the learned District Judge referred the Devasthanam to a regular suit by his order dated April 18, 1930.
The properties which arc the subject matter of these proceedings belong to the Idol installed in the famous temple of Tirupathi in the State of Andhra Pradesh.
O. S. 51 was to recover possession of 10 items of property situated at Tirupathi and Tirumalai and O. S. 52 was to recover one item of property at Tirumalai.
The successors in the office of the Mahant of the Mutt were, in accordance with the sanad by which the East India Company transferred the right of management, successively in management of the institution but during later years there were companyplaints of mismanagement and in the early years of this century a suit was instituted under Section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code for the framing of a scheme for the better management of the institution and such a scheme was framed by the District Court which was, with some modification, affirmed by the High Court and later by the Privy Council Vide Prayag Das Ji v. Tirumala Srirangacharla, ILR 30 Mad 138 PC .
The next submission of learned companynsel was in relation to the quantum of mesne profits allowed for items 4, 6, 7, 8 and 9 in appeal 108.
Two suits O. S. 51 and 52 of 1937 were accordingly filed by the Devasthanam on April 9, 1937.
The Act came into force on June 6, 1933.
Even when this decree was challenged by the Mahant by an appeal to the High Court numberobjection was taken to this rate.
65/ per month.
The East India Company were, till about the middle of the last century, in management and administration of the properties of this famous temple of Lord Venkatesvara or Srinivasa, also known as Balaji in Northern India and the other companynected temples, and after the Madras Regulation 7 of 1817 was passed it was placed under the companytrol and management of the Board of Revenue who carried on the administration through the Collector of the District.
The relief claimed in the suits was for possession of the properties which was specified in the plaint and for mesne profits.
Rajagopala Ayyangar, J. These four appeals which are on certificates of fitness granted by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh arise out of decrees passed in applications filed under Section 20 Rule 12, Civil Procedure Code in two suits brought by the Tirumalai Tirupathi Devasthanam Committee hereinafter referred to as the Devasthanam Committee the predecessor of the respondents for the ascertainment of mesne profits of the Devasthanam properties in the possession of the Mahant of the Sri Hathiramjee Mutt who as the Vicharanakartha or manager of the Tirumalai Tirupathi temples was previously in management of the properties of the temple.
The learned Subordinate Judge decreed the two suits on June 15, 1942 and granted to the plaintiff possession and directed an enquiry into and a decree for mesne profits payable by the Mahant from June 7, 1933.
The Mahant, however, did number immediately surrender possession of the properties, with the result that applications had to be made for executing the decree for possession and within a few clays after this application was made the possession of the immoveable proper ties was delivered to the Devasthanams Committee, on January 10, 1946.
The present appeals arise out of orders passed ascertaining the mesne profits of the properties decreed to the Devasthanam Committee in O. S. 51 and 52 of 1937 under Order 20 Rule 12, Civil Procedure Code, and the decrees passed thereon.
The learned Judges of the High Court accepted this submission and on a fresh and detailed reconsideration of the evidence fixed the rent derivable from the item at Rs.
