He died during the pendency of the appeal before us and his two sons have been joined as appellants Nos.
1 herein was the trustee of the said temples.
The Trial Court took the view that, although this question companyld be decided primarily only by the Endowment Board and Civil Court has numberjurisdiction to go into it, it companyld go into that question incidentally as was done by the Trial Court.
The plaintiffs preferred an appeal against this decision to the Madras High Court.
Following upon this reasoning, the companyrt allowed the appeal and passed a preliminary decree against defendant No.
A Division Bench of the Madras High Court after examining the provi sions of the said Act held that the Trial Court was number right in dismissing the suit in toto even with regard to the relief of accounting.
As a companyse quence of this companyclusion, the Trial Court held that the suit was barred by the provisions of the said Act and was number maintainable at law.
The said Act does number companytain any provision for rendition of accounts.
The High Court held that defendant No.
From the Judgment and Order dated 7.2.1972 of the Madras High Court in Appeal No.
The Trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that it was barred by the provisions of the said Act.
He, inter alia, companytended that the suit as framed was number maintainable in law, in view of the provi sions of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 hereinafter referred to as the said Act.
1 herein, for an order directing him to render true and proper accounts of the management of the properties of the Thousand Yadhava Commu nity including the Sri Ramasami Sri Navaneetha Krishnasami Devasthanam Temples and their properties and to pay to the plaintiffs the amount ascertained as payable on such rendi tion of accounts with interest and other reliefs.
1 along with some others filed a petition for Special Leave before this Court and by an order dated April 24, 1972.
1 to 5 along with one other person filed a representative suit on behalf of themselves and other members of the Thousand Yadhava Community residing in Ramayanachavadi Street and the other adjoining lanes in North Masi Street, Madurai Town and adjoining villages against original appellant No.
The defendant denied these allegations.
Special Leave was granted by this Court but was companyfined to the question whether it was within the power of the Civil Court to direct accounts to be taken without deciding the question whether the temple is a public temple or a private temple.
The Trial Court held that the said temples were number private temples belonging to the aforesaid companymunity, namely, Thou sand Yadhava Community.
A party seeking relief of accounting cannot ap proach the Deputy Commissioner or any other authority under the said Act and hence, the Civil Court is number barred either expressly or by necessary implication from entertaining a suit in so far as it was for the relief of accounting.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
1045 of 1972.
1 original appellant before us admitted that he was elect ed in 1949 as the trustee of the said temples at a meeting of the members of the companymunity.
1 for rendition of accounts while dismissing the suit in all other respects.
549 of 1963.
Very briefly stated, according to the plaintiffs, the said temples were private religious trusts and the defendant had companymitted several acts of mismanagement in respect of the properties of the said trusts.
Original appellant No.
Raj Choudhary, B.R. Agarwal and Ms. Sushma Manchanda for the Respondents.
1 i to 1 ii in this appeal.
Ramkumar for the Appellants.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KANIA, J. This is an appeal by Special Leave against a judgment of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court deliv ered on February 7, 1972.
Respondents Nos.
