he died during the pendency of the proceedings and is number represented by appellant number 2 mahant gangaram das bavajee.
it is alleged to be a private temple knumbern as jagannadhaswami temple balaga and is meant for the worship of the mahant and his disciples one of whom companyducts the daily worship.
appeal from the judgment and decree dated april 6 1955 of the former andhra high companyrt in s.o.
the plaintiffs also filed a number of documents.
sithaldas bavajee the sixth head of the institution who lived in the first half of the nineteenth century built a temple and installed therein certain idols for his private worship.
on appeal the high companyrt came to a different companyclusion and allowed the appeal.
the appellants thereafter filed a petition under s. 84 2 of the act in the companyrt of the district judge vizagapatam and prayed for the setting aside of the order of the board.
the income from the various properties granted to malukdas bavajee or his successors had been regularly utilised for the maintenance of the head of the institution and for distributing charities to the sadhus and pilgrims passing through balaga.
a part of the income was however spent on the expenses of the worship in the temple and the incidental expenses companynected with it.
the high companyrt relied on the statement of the solitary witness examined for the board and rejected the statements of the witnesses examined for the appellants.
v. r. tatachari for the appellants.
the appellants examined five witnesses including plaintiff number 2 in support of their case.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 87 of 1959.
the respondent examined one witness.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by raghubar dayal j. this is an appeal on a certificate granted by the high companyrt of andhra pradesh against the judgment and order of the high companyrt reversing the judgment and order of the district judge vizagapatam holding that the place of worship in suit was number a temple as defined in the madras hindu religious endowments act 1926 madras act ii of 1927 hereinafter called the act.
december 21.
the emperor in recognition of the bavajees piety and devotion to god made certain grants to him with the object and purpose of enabling him to maintain himself and carry on the distribution of sadavarthy to fakirs and sadhus and to pray to god for the prosperity of the empire and emperor according to what was stated in the well knumbern historical works like bhakthamala by maharaja raghunandha singh deo of rewa.
he therefore set aside the impugned order of the board.
the respondent filed a few documents which included the boards order dated march 28 1947 and its enclosure.
the original plaintiff number 2 rajaram das bavajee was the ninth in succession from the founder malukdas bavajee.
the respondent board denied that jagannadhaswami temple was a private place of worship that the public had numberaccess to it without the permission of the bavajee and alleged that the temple possessed all the features of a place of public religious worship and was dedicated to or for the benefit of or used as of right by the hindu community as a place of religious worship.
the institution flourished and companytinues up to this day.
it mainly relied on the entries in the inam registers with respect to the institution and on the following facts which it companysidered to be established the temple is a very old temple constructed in or about the year 1750 the temple has the structure and polity of a public temple there are utsava vigrahams and vahanams it has a big companypound wall with the gate opening into the chinna bazaar road regular worship is performed every day at the scheduled time there is an archaka who performs worship a large number of pilgrims attend every day and partake in the food given after naivedyam to the god there are utsavams and the rathotsavam which is particularly companyducted on large scale and is attended by members of the public.
number 134/50.
bhimasankaram k. r. choudhuri and t. m. sen for the respondent.
the shrine was an adjunct of the institution poohari fakir sadavarthy.
they alleged that the institution knumbern as the poohari fakir sadavarthy at bondilipuram chicacole a ongstanding institution was started by one malukdas bavajee some time during the reign of the moghul emperor aurangazeb.
on march 28 1947 the board of companymissioners for hindu religious charitable endowments madras held the institution in suit to be a temple as defined in the act.
